The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 02272024 - BOS Complete Min PktMeeting Minutes - Final CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Supervisor John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor Ken Carlson, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Clerk of the Board (925) 655-2000 clerkoftheboard@cob.cccounty.us 9:00 AMAdministration Building 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez | https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/87344719204 | Call in: 888-278-0254 access code 843298# Tuesday, February 27, 2024 1.CALL TO ORDER; ROLL CALL District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Ken Carlson, and District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Present: Rollcall District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Ken Carlson, and District V Supervisor Federal D. Glover Present: 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3 CLOSED SESSION Page 1 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 A.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code § 54957.6) 1.Agency Negotiators: Monica Nino. Employee Organizations: Public Employees Union, Local 1; AFSCME Locals 512 and 2700; California Nurses Assn.; SEIU Locals 1021 and 2015; District Attorney Investigators’ Assn.; Deputy Sheriffs Assn.; United Prof. Firefighters I.A.F.F., Local 1230; Physicians’ & Dentists’ Org. of Contra Costa; Western Council of Engineers; United Chief Officers Assn.; Contra Costa County Defenders Assn.; Contra Costa County Deputy District Attorneys’ Assn.; Prof. & Tech. Engineers IFPTE, Local 21; and Teamsters Local 856. 2.Agency Negotiators: Monica Nino. Unrepresented Employees: All unrepresented employees. There were no reports from Closed Session . 4.Inspirational Thought- "The essence of America—that which really unites us—is not ethnicity, or nationality or religion—it is an idea—and what an idea it is: That you can come from humble circumstances and do great things." ~Condoleezza Rice 5.CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.156 on the following agenda) – Items are subject to removal from Consent Calendar by request of any Supervisor. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be considered with the Discussion Items. approved District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover Aye: Result:Passed 6.PRESENTATIONS PR.1 PRESENTATION proclaiming February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence Awareness Month, as recommended by the Employment & Human Services Director in partnership with STAND! for Families Free of Violence. (Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director) 7.DISCUSSION ITEMS Page 2 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 D.1.HEARING to consider an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s denial of a 10-lot major subdivision at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road in the unincorporated Pleasant Hill area and to consider approving the project, including approving a vesting tentative map, approving a density bonus, adopting a mitigated negative declaration, and related actions. (County File No. CDSD20-09531) (Andy Byde – Applicant; Grayson Road LLC – Property; Andy Byde/Calibr Ventures, Inc. – Appellant). (Joseph Lawlor, Department of Conservation and Development) 24-0618 Attachments:CDSD20-09531 Findings and COAs Appeal Letter 01192024 IS_MND and MMRP CPC and ZA Staff Reports Vesting Tentative Map, and Other Project Materials Public Comments Presentation CDSD20-09531 02272024 Correspondence Received.pdf Applicant Presentation.pdf Speakers: Ann M. Keeler; Art West; Kirsten West; Jeanne Shikany; Molly Bonney; Brian Francois; Suzanne Francois; Brian Bonney, Neighbors of Grayson Creek; Patrick King; Carolyn Chiefetz, Friends of Grayson Creek; Greg Cheifetz, Friends of Grayson Creek; Danel R. Hauze; Lisa Shikany; Lacey Friedman; Jan Warren; John King, Eagle Scout, Troop 405. Written correspondence provided by: Lisa Shikany; Michael Dawson, Save Lafayette Trees; Karin Gregory, Lafayette; Regehr Bentley, Housing and Community Development, State of California; Michael McDowell; Patrick King, Friends of Grayson Creek; Lisa Shikany (2) (attached). approved Motion:Carlson GioiaSecond: District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover Aye: Result:Passed Page 3 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 D.2.HEARING to consider an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s approval of a 10-lot major subdivision at 3180 Walnut Boulevard in the unincorporated Walnut Creek area and to consider approving the project, including approving a vesting tentative map, approving a density bonus, adopting a mitigated negative declaration, and related actions. (County File No. CDSD21-09581) (Andy Byde – Applicant; Calibr Ventures, Inc. – Property; William Goodwin – Appellant). (Dominique Vogelpohl, Department of Conservation and Development) 24-0617 Attachments:Attachment 1 - Walnut Blvd Findings and Conditions of Approval Attachment 2 - Appeal Letter Attachment 3 - IS_MND and MMRP Attachment 4 - CPC and ZA Staff Reports Attachment 5 - Vesting Tentative Map, Project Plans, and Materials Presentation CDSD21-09581 Correspondence Received.pdf Applicant Presentation..pdf Speakers: Gene Dangel; Evan Smith; Lacey Friedman; Jan Warren . Written correspondence provided by: Signe Swenson, Lafayette; Brenda Wood; Gene Dangel (attached). approved Motion:Carlson AndersenSecond: District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover Aye: Result:Passed D.3.CONSIDER authorizing the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to sign letter of commitment to the Delta Protection Commission to support the implementation of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area Management Plan. (Supervisor Burgis) 24-0473 Attachments:2024-02-27-Item-XX-NHA-Mgmt-Plan approved Motion:Burgis CarlsonSecond: District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover Aye: Result:Passed Page 4 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 D.4.CONSIDER accepting monthly update on the activities and oversight of the County's Head Start Program, and provide guidance. (Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director) 24-0474 Attachments:ACF Program Instruction 24-01.pdf Head Start Update BOS Feb 2024.pdf Notice of Award-Carryover.pdf approved Motion:Burgis CarlsonSecond: District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover Aye: Result:Passed D.5.CONSIDER consent item previously removed. Consent item C.41 was removed by public request for clarification . Speakers: Luz Gomez, Chair, Sustainability Commission; Marti Roach, 350 Contra Costa Action; Howdy Goudy, El Cerrito. On January 2, 2024, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated a City of Berkeley ordinance that prohibited natural gas infrastructure in new buildings. (California Rest. Ass'n v. City of Berkeley (9th Cir. 2024) 89 F.4th 1094.) The court held that the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (“EPCA”), a federal statute that regulates the energy efficiency of several consumer products including water heaters, furnaces, stoves, and HVAC systems, precludes cities and counties from adopting ordinances that prohibit the installation of gas plumbing in buildings. The County’s all-electric building requirement, like the invalidated City of Berkeley ordinance, prohibits the installation of gas plumbing in new buildings. Accordingly, the Director of the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) recommends that the Board suspend enforcement of the County’s all-electric building requirement while DCD staff evaluates alternative methods of meeting the County’s Climate Action Plan goals while also complying with the Ninth Circuit’s decision. C.41 was subsequently approved by unanimous vote and referred to the Sustainability Commission . D.6.PUBLIC COMMENT (2 Minutes/Speaker) There were no requests to speak at public comment . D.7.CONSIDER reports of Board members. Supervisors Burgis, Carlson and Glover attended the February 10-13, 2024 National Association of Counties (NACo) Legislative Conference in Washington D .C.; Supervisor Burgis congratulated Contra Costa County on its February 18, 2024 174th birthday. 8.ADJOURN Adjourned today's meeting at 12:35 p.m. Page 5 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 9.CONSENT CALENDAR CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS approved the Consent Agenda District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover Aye: Result:Passed Airport C.1.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports to submit a grant application to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and accept funding up to $505,525 to reimburse the Airports Division for design costs related to the Security Upgrade Project at Buchanan Field, Pacheco area (100% Airport Enterprise Fund). 24-0475 approved C.2.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-69 to approve a records retention policy for the Airports Division in the Public Works Department, as recommended by the Director of Airports, Countywide. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-69 Attachments:Airports Retention Policy Retention Schedule A adopted Animal Services C.3.RATIFY the Animal Services Director’s acceptance of the California for All Animals Program Sniptember Spay/Neuter grant through UC Davis, in an amount up to $100,000 for the initial term of January 20, 2023, through January 19, 2024; and AUTHORIZE and APPROVE the Animal Services Director, or designee, to extend the grant term, and execute any necessary grant actions or modifications, through December 31, 2025. (100% State funds) 24-0476 Speaker: Lisa Kirk. approved Assessor C.4.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Assessor, or designee, to execute a Software Maintenance and Support Agreement with The Sidwell Company, in the amount of $23,802 for maintenance and support for the Parcel Fabric Geographic Information System for the period of October 3, 2023, through October 2, 2024. (100% General Fund) 24-0477 approved Page 6 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.5.DENY the claims filed by Golden State Water Company (formerly known as, Southern California Water Company) and ExteNet Systems, LLC in the total amount of $81,803, plus interest, in unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2019/2020. 24-0478 Attachments:Attachment A Attachment B approved Board Standing Committees (referred items) C.6.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the allocation of Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds in the amount of $74,522 to fund 11 conservation projects fully or partially, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. (100% Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund) 24-0479 Attachments:FWC_memo_IOC_01-26-24 approved C.7.ACCEPT a status report on youth services and the Independent Living Skills Program activities, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. 24-0480 Attachments:FHS Youth Services Presentation approved Clerk of the Board C.8.REAPPOINT Dennisha Marsh to the At Large seat on the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee to a term that will expire on December 31, 2026, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. 24-0481 Attachments:Marsh, Dennisha (LMHAC) Calbert, Arthur (LMHAC) Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee News Release 10.16.2023 approved C.9.REAPPOINT Shawn Stappen to an At Large Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. 24-0482 Attachments:Shawn M Stappen (AAC) Redacted approved C.10 . REAPPOINT Dean Hickman-Smith to the Aviation Advisory Committee, Byron Neighbor Seat to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. 24-0483 Attachments:Hickman-Smith Dean (AAC) Redacted approved Page 7 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.11 . REAPPOINT Rachel Rosekind to the District I seat on the Library Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2028, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. 24-0484 approved C.12 . REAPPOINT Richard Celestre to the City of Pleasant Hill seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring on February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Pleasant Hill City Council. 24-0485 Attachments:Celestre Reappt to Pleasant Hill Seat on the AAC Redacted approved C.13 . ACCEPT the resignation of Floy Andrews, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I seat on the Assessment Appeals board for a term ending on September 1, 2024 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. 24-0486 Attachments:Vacancy Notice.pdf approved C.14 . ACCEPT the resignation of Emilie F. Whelan, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I 1st alternate seat on the El Sobrante Municipal Advisory Council for a term ending on December 31, 2026 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. 24-0487 Attachments:Vacancy Notice.pdf approved C.15 . APPOINT Thomas Fenster to the Public Member #1 seat and Dr. Jutta Burger to the Public Member #2 seat on the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee for terms that will expire on December 31, 2027, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. 24-0488 Attachments:2024 0202 Memo to IOC re 2 public seats Burger, Jutta (IPMAC) Fenster, Thomas (IPMAC) approved Page 8 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.16 . APPOINT Lisa Martell to the Environmental Organization #2 Seat, Rohan Tyagi to the Environmental Organization #2 Alternate Seat, Tim Bancroft to the General Public Seat, Jim Payne to the Labor #2 Seat, and Nick Plurkowski to the Labor #2 Alternate Seat on the Hazardous Materials Commission, all to terms that will expire on December 31, 2027, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. 24-0489 Attachments:Application -Charles Davidson_HazMat Application -NIcholas Plurkowski_HazMat Application -Tim Bancroft_HazMat Application_Jim Payne_HazMat Application_Johnson, Theresa_HazMat Application_Martell, Lisa_HazMat Application_Tyagi, Rohan_HazMat HMC 2024 Roster, 2,1,24 CC Labor Council nomination letter for Jim Payne and Nicholas Plurkowski HMC nomination letter for Martell, 1,24,24 Sustainable Contra Costa nomination letter for Rohan Tyagi, approved C.17 . APPOINT Natalie Oleas to the District IV Alternate Seat on the Measure X Community Advisory Board for a term ending March 31, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Carlson. 24-0490 approved C.18 . APPOINT Elizabeth Leddy, a Lafayette resident, to the District II seat on the Contra Costa County Aviation Advisory Committee for a term ending February 28, 2027, effective March 1, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen. 24-0491 approved C.19 . APPOINT Debi Mackey to the District V Alternate Seat on the Assessment Appeals Board for a term ending September 7, 2026, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. 24-0492 approved C.20 . APPOINT Peter Baker to the Aviation Advisory Committee, Pacheco Neighbor Seat to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. (No fiscal impact) 24-0493 Attachments:Baker Peter (AAC) Redacted approved C.21 . APPOINT Eduardo Torres to the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council Seat 6 for a term ending December 31, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. 24-0494 approved Page 9 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.22 . APPOINT Isabel Renggenathen to the District V Seat on the Family and Children's Trust Committee for a term ending September 30, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. 24-0495 approved C.23 . APPOINT Contesa Tate to the District V Seat 1 on the Contra Costa County Mental Health Commission for a term ending June 30, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. 24-0496 approved C.24 . APPOINT Kanwar Singh to the District V Public Sector Seat on the Economic Opportunity Council to a term expiring June 30, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. 24-0497 approved C.25 . APPOINT Gene Jackson to the District V Alternate Seat on the Measure X Community Advisory Board for a term ending March 31, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. 24-0498 approved C.26 . APPROVE and ADOPT revisions to the Integrated Pest Management Policy and Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee Bylaws, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. (No fiscal impact) 24-0499 Attachments:2024 0202 IPM Policy_DRAFT _Tracked Changes 2024 0202 IPM Policy_DRAFT _Clean Copy 2024 0202 IPM Bylaws_DRAFT_Tracked Changes 2024 0202 IPM Bylaws_DRAFT_Clean Copy IPMAC Membership Slides 2024 0227.pdf approved C.27 . APPROVE amendments to the Aviation Advisory Committee bylaws as recommended by the Aviation Advisory Committee. (No fiscal impact) 24-0500 Attachments:AAC ByLaws-2024 Amendment Redline.pdf AAC ByLaws-2024 Amendment Clean approved C.28 . ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-64 recognizing Carl J. Roner, for his 20 years of service to Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Public Works Director. RES 2024-64 Attachments:Resolution 2024-64.pdf adopted Page 10 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.29 . ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-65 proclaiming February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence Awareness Month, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director in partnership with STAND! for Families Free of Violence. RES 2024-65 Attachments:Resolution 2024-65.pdf adopted C.30 . ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-66 recognizing Jim Pinckney for his 35 Years of Service on the Board of Trustees of The Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen . RES 2024-66 Attachments:Resolution 2024-66.pdf adopted C.31 . ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-67 honoring Irma Anderson for her Legacy of Leadership and Service to Richmond and Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. RES 2024-67 Attachments:Resolution 2024-67.pdf adopted C.32 . ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-68 declaring February 29, 2024 Rare Disease Day in Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. RES 2024-68 Attachments:Resolution 2024-68.pdf adopted Clerk-Recorder/Elections C.33 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective January 1, 2024, with Netfile, Inc., to extend the term through March 31, 2027 and increase the payment limit by $175,000 to a new payment limit of $350,000 to provide electronic filing services for California Fair Political Practice Commission (FPPC) Statements of Economic Interest (Form 700) and FPPC Campaign Finance Disclosures, and AB 1234 ethics training, certification, and tracking thereof. (100% General Fund) 24-0501 approved C.34 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract with the Lions Center for the Visually Impaired in the amount of $150 to rent its Pittsburg facility for use as a polling site for the March 5, 2024 Primary Election. (100% General Fund) 24-0502 approved Page 11 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.35 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Secretary of State to pay the County an amount not to exceed $85,077 to serve voters with disabilities and to increase accessibility under the Help America Vote Act for the period of January 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (100% Federal, no County match) 24-0503 approved C.36 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute legal documents to provide a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) loan of $994,807 and a HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) loan of $1,000,000 to Chesley Avenue, L.P., a nonprofit limited partnership, to rehabilitate the Chesley Mutual Housing affordable apartment project located at 802 Chesley Avenue in the City of Richmond. (100% Federal) 24-0504 Attachments:Chesley Mutual County Regulatory Agreement (2023) Chesley Mutual Housing County Loan Deed of Trust (2023) Chesley Mutual Housing HOME and CDBG Loan Promissory Note (2023) Chesley Mutual Housing HOME and CDBG Regulatory Agreement (2023) Chesley Mutual Housing HOMEand CDBG Loan Agreement (2023) Chesley Mutual Housing Intercreditor Agreement (with Richmond) (2023) Chesley Mutual Termination and Release of Regulatory Agreemen Chesley Request for Notice approved C.37 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a funding agreement between the East Bay Regional Park District and Contra Costa County to disburse $201,580 in Navy Mitigation Funds to complete final design and environmental permitting for the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure Project in Martinez, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (No General Fund impact) 24-0505 Attachments:Exhibit A - Navy Mitigation Fund Expend Plan Amended Feb 9 2010 Exhibit B - Letter, Request from EBRPD for Navy Mitigation Funds Exhibit C - Great CA Delta Trail Master Plan (Excerpt) Exhibit D - DRAFT Co-op Agreement, EBRPD Great CA Gap Closure project - planning funds approved Page 12 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.38 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (RecycleMore) requiring RecycleMore to perform some of the County’s regulatory obligations pertaining to reduction of organic waste disposal within the portion of the unincorporated West County area served by Richmond Sanitary Service under the solid waste collection franchise agreement with the County. (No fiscal impact) 24-0506 Attachments:Memorandum of Understanding Between Contra Costa County and West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority Regarding Implementation of SB 1383 Regulations approved Auditor-Controller C.39 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay an amount not to exceed $60,000 to Republic Services for debris clean-up boxes to assist with Community Clean-up events throughout unincorporated Contra Costa County for period February 13, 2024 to June 30, 2025, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (100% Clean California Grant funding) 24-0507 approved C.40 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller to issue payment of $45,000 to the U.S. Geological Survey to support their research on golden eagle nest locations in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (100% Contra Costa Avian Fund) 24-0508 approved Conservation & Development C.41 . DIRECT the County Building Official to suspend enforcement of the County’s all-electric building requirement that all newly constructed residential buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings be constructed as all-electric buildings, and related actions, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (No fiscal impact) 24-0509 approved Motion:Andersen CarlsonSecond: District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover Aye: Result:Passed Page 13 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 County Administration C.42 . RECEIVE the 2023-2024 property tax administrative cost recovery report of the Auditor-Controller, FIX March 19, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. for a public hearing on the determination of property tax administrative costs, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to notify affected local jurisdictions of the public hearing and to prepare and publish the required legal notice and make supporting documentation available for public inspection, as recommended by the County Administrator. 24-0510 Attachments:2023-2024 Property Tax Administration Charges Report .pdf approved C.43 . APPROVE the Fiscal Year 2023/2024 Phillips Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Return to Source Fund Allocation in the amount of $180,000 for signage and landscape enhancements in Rodeo, Pacheco, and Clyde, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. (100% General Fund) 24-0511 approved C.44 . APPOINT Warren Lai as the Public Works Director of Contra Costa County at Step 3 of the salary range, including all benefits as provided in the current Management Resolution that apply to the position of Public Works Director, effective February 27, 2024. 24-0512 approved County Counsel C.45 . RECEIVE public report of litigation settlement agreements that became final during the period January 1, 2024, through January 31, 2024. 24-0513 approved C.46 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Counsel, or designee, to execute, a fifth amended and restated legal services contract, effective January 1, 2024, among Soluri Meserve, a Law Corporation, and the Counties of Contra Costa, Solano, and San Joaquin, to pay the firm an amount not to exceed $67,500 in each of 2024 and 2025, for a total contract payment limit of $456,500, for the firm’s legal work for the Delta Counties Coalition through December 31, 2025. (100% Water Agency Funds) 24-0514 approved Page 14 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.47 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Counsel, or designee, on behalf of the County and the Contra Costa County Water Agency, to execute a common interest agreement and contracts for legal services with The Freeman Firm, Soluri Meserve, and the Law Office of Roger B. Moore, all effective December 6, 2023, in connection with County of San Joaquin, et al. v. Department of Water Resources, et al. (Sacramento Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 24WM000010). (100% Water Agency Funds) 24-0515 District Attorney C.48 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a contract with the ELD Experts LLC, (dba Monarch) in an amount not to exceed $3,489 to purchase and install a camera at the public service counter at the County Clerk-Recorder’s Office for investigative purpose. (100% Recording fees) 24-0516 approved C.49 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a contract with Amped Software USA., Inc. in an amount not to exceed $2,475 for the continued usage of a proprietary forensic image and video processing software for investigative purpose. (100% General Fund) 24-0517 approved Employment & Human Services C.50 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa Economic Partnership, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $585,000 to provide program implementation of the Healthcare Initiative with the Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County for the period December 1, 2023, through March 31, 2026. (100% State) 24-0518 approved C.51 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Director, a purchase order with SurveyMonkey Inc. in an amount not to exceed $24,830 for the purchase of survey management software to provide survey capabilities for the period October 29, 2023, through October 28, 2024. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County) 24-0519 approved C.52 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Evident Change, in an amount not to exceed $286,871 to provide SafeMeasures child welfare reporting services for the period of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2028. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County) 24-0520 approved Page 15 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.53 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Community Tech Network, a nonprofit agency, in an amount not to exceed $447,000 to provide services and tablets to seniors and adults with disabilities funded under the Access to Technology Grant Program for the period February 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024. (100% State) 24-0521 approved C.54 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with KinderCare Learning Centers LLC to increase the payment limit by $226,026 to an amount not to exceed $1,120,015 to provide Head Start and Early Head Start services, and State General Childcare program services, with no change to term July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. (51% Federal, 49% State) 24-0522 approved C.55 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Director, a purchase order with R-Computer in an amount not to exceed $15,300 and an Articulate Global, LLC End User License Agreement for the period November 21, 2023 through June 30, 2025 for the purchase of Articulate licenses. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County General Fund) 24-0523 approved C.56 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept grant funding and execute an agreement with the Employment Training Panel in an amount not to exceed $741,040 to administer a healthcare workforce training program for the period March 1, 2024 through March 30, 2027. (100% State, no County match) 24-0524 approved C.57 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a revenue agreement in an amount not to exceed $749,675, with California Labor and Workforce Agency Employment Training Panel, to administer a workforce training program for the period February 28, 2024 through October 29, 2025. (100% State, no County match) 24-0525 approved Page 16 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.58 . APPROVE the California Department of Social Services California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids System Improvement Plan for the period of February 2024 through June 2026, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director, and AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign the System Improvement Plan . 24-0526 Attachments:AppendixA-CalOAR Report SignOffSheet Contra Costa EHSD WFS Cal-SIP 2021-2026 approved C.59 . ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-62 to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a revenue amendment with the California Department of Community Services and Development to increase the payment limit by $9,455 to an amount not to exceed $945,470 for Community Services Block Grant program services with no change to the period January 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024. (100% Federal) RES 2024-62 adopted C.60 . ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-63 to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with the California Department of Community Services and Development to decrease the payment limit by $59,000 to a new payment limit of $317,446 and to extend the term through March 31, 2024 to administer the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program. (100% Federal, no County match) RES 2024-63 adopted C.61 . RATIFY the Employment and Human Services Department’s grant application; and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept funding if awarded up to $4,000,000 from the Displaced Oil and Gas Workers Fund, and execute a revenue agreement, and any extensions or amendments thereof, with the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency for the period July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027. (100% State, no County match) 24-0527 approved Health Services C.62 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with 1125 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Operating Company, LLC (dba Kentfield Hospital), in an amount not to exceed $9,300,000 to provide long term acute care services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0528 approved Page 17 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.63 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Leica Microsystems Inc ., effective February 27, 2024, to decrease the minimum monthly purchase commitment required under the Instrument Acquisition Agreement for reagent supplies, support and maintenance for tissue sample equipment at the Clinical Laboratory at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center with no change in the payment limit or term ending January 3, 2028. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0529 approved C.64 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute an amendment with Roche Diagnostics Corporation, effective February 27, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $1,046,875 to an amount not to exceed $2,577,300 and extend the term through December 31, 2032, for additional equipment, services, reagents and supplies to provide processing services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0530 approved C.65 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Jigsaw Diagnostics, A Professional Psychology Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $400,000 to provide Behavioral Health Treatment - Comprehensive Diagnostic Evaluation services for Contra Costa Health Plan members for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0531 approved C.66 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Sunrise ABA LLC, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide Behavioral Health Treatment-Applied Behavioral Analysis services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0532 approved C.67 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Portia Bell Hume Behavioral Health and Training Center, for provision of additional Mental Health Services Act Full Service Partnership Services to non-Medi-Cal adults with serious mental illness who are homeless or at serious risk of homelessness with no change in the payment limit or term ending June 30, 2024. (100% Mental Health Services Act) 24-0533 approved Page 18 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.68 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Vibrantcare Outpatient Rehabilitation of California, in an amount not to exceed $2,700,000 to provide physical therapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0534 approved C.69 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Hilltop Radiology, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000 to provide diagnostic imaging services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and County recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0535 approved C.70 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with National Eye Care, Inc ., effective March 31, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $95,000 to a new payment limit of $285,000 and extend the term through June 30, 2025 to provide additional optometry services at Martinez Detention Facility. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0536 approved C.71 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with George Lee, M.D., effective March 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $520,000 to an amount not to exceed $2,680,000 to provide additional anesthesiology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers with no change in the term ending May 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0537 approved C.72 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Peyman Keyashian, M .D., effective March 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $380,000 to an amount not exceed $2,660,000, to provide additional anesthesiology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers with no change in the term ending May 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0538 approved Page 19 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.73 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with SHS Consulting, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $302,480 to provide consultation and technical assistance to the Behavioral Health Services Director in regard to information technology and data management for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2025. (100% Mental Health Realignment) 24-0615 approved C.74 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Yosemite Pathology Medical Group, Inc ., in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 to provide pathology laboratory services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0539 approved C.75 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Guardant Health, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0540 approved C.76 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with MDxHealth, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0541 approved C.77 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Gregg T. Pottorff, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide orthopedic services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0542 approved Page 20 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.78 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to purchase on behalf of the Health Service Director, gift cards totaling an amount not to exceed $10,150 to provide support for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) Medi-Cal members to participate on the CCHP Community Advisory Committee and in focus groups, interviews, surveys, and listening sessions for the period January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. (100% California Department of Health Care Services) 24-0543 approved C.79 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with BioReference Health, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0544 approved C.80 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Total Anesthesia Care, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,050,000 to provide anesthesiology services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0545 approved C.81 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Robert Buckley, M .D., effective March 1, 2024, to modify the rate for orthopedic clinic coverage at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers with no change in the payment limit or term ending November 8, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0546 approved C.82 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Danny Wu, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $900,000 to provide gastroenterology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0547 approved Page 21 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.83 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Herculean Babies Pediatrics, in an amount not to exceed $750,000 to provide pediatric primary care services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0548 approved C.84 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Seneca Family of Agencies, in an amount not to exceed $1,057,429 to provide mobile crisis response services for youth in Contra Costa County for the period January 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024. (100% Mental Health Services Act) 24-0549 approved C.85 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with ABL Health Care, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide home health care services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0550 approved C.86 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Locumtenens .com, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000 to provide temporary physician coverage during peak loads, temporary absences, vacations and emergency situations where additional physician staffing is required at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0551 approved C.87 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Spin Recruitment, Inc. (dba Spin Recruitment Advertising), in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide advertising and recruitment services for the Health Services Department for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2025. (100% County General Fund) 24-0552 approved C.88 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the City of San Pablo, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $340,127 for the Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement Program to provide homeless outreach services for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2026. (No County match) 24-0553 approved Page 22 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.89 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc . (dba Heluna Health), to pay County an amount not to exceed $25,000 for participation in the FoodNet Expanded Case Exposure Ascertainment Project to study foodborne bacteria for the period August 1, 2023 through July 31, 2024. (No County match) 24-0554 approved C.90 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Shelter, Inc., to extend the term through December 31, 2024 with no change in the payment limit of $500,000 to continue providing rapid rehousing services to individuals and families experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of becoming homeless in Contra Costa County. (100% Homeless, Housing, Assistance and Prevention funds) 24-0555 approved C.91 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions), effective March 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $169,583 to an amount not to exceed $2,330,170 and extend the term through September 30, 2024 to continue providing rapid rehousing and homeless prevention services to families enrolled in County’s Employment and Human Services Department CalWORKs program. (100% Employment and Human Services Department) 24-0556 approved C.92 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Spok Inc., in an amount not to exceed $119,000 to provide hardware, software, implementation, maintenance and support for the upgrade of the telephone system at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period February 27, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0557 approved C.93 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center), in an amount not to exceed $375,000 to provide outpatient psychotherapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0558 approved Page 23 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.94 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Computacenter United States Inc., in an amount not to exceed $398,708 for the purchase of Dell PowerEdge Servers and hardware and software support and maintenance services for the period from April 1, 2024 through May 1, 2029. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0559 approved C.95 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Connect Hearing, Inc ., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide hearing aid dispensing services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0560 approved C.96 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Young M Kim, M.D. (dba Youngs OB/GYN), in an amount not to exceed $750,000 to provide obstetrics and gynecology services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0561 approved C.97 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Naman Shah, M .D., in an amount not to exceed $450,000 to provide emergency medicine physician services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0562 approved C.98 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Dialysis Access Center, A Medical Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $2,700,000 to provide dialysis and ambulatory surgical services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0563 approved C.99 . APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Baltic Sea Manor, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $262,000 to provide augmented board and care services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers patients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0564 approved Page 24 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.10 0. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to provide long term acute care services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0565 approved C.10 1. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with California Mental Health Services Authority in an amount not to exceed $240,791 to act as fiscal agent for the provision of specialty mental health services for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025. (100% Mental Health Realignment) 24-0566 approved C.10 2. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Kerecis LLC in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to procure fish skin and biological dressing supplies for the Operating Department at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period from February 1, 2024 through July 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0567 approved C.10 3. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Health Management Associates, Inc., effective February 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $300,000 to a new payment limit of $600,000 for additional actuarial consulting services for the Contra Costa Health Plan with no change in the term ending September 30, 2024. (100% Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0568 approved C.10 4. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Northern California Cornea Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $900,000 to provide ophthalmology services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) 24-0569 approved Page 25 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.10 5. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Hill-Rom Company, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $161,844 to provide preventative maintenance and repair services for specialty hospital beds at Contra Costa Regional Medical and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0606 approved C.10 6. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Medline Industries, LP, effective February 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $2,116,950 for end-to-end distribution services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Center locations with no change in the term ending June 30, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0570 approved C.10 7. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay the Virtusa Corporation an amount not to exceed $45,617 for a compliance reporting software subscription for the period from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024, as recommended by the Health Services Director. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0616 approved C.10 8. APPROVE the new medical staff, affiliates, and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, medical staff advancement and voluntary resignations as recommended by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, and by the Health Services Director. (No fiscal impact) 24-0571 Attachments:October List approved 11.7.23 Revised October List approved C.10 9. ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26264 to increase the hours of two Certified Nursing Assistant positions in the Health Services Department. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0572 Attachments:P300-26264 Signed P300 C.109.pdf approved C.11 0. ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26265 to increase the hours of one Registered Nurse position from Permanent-Intermittent to Permanent Part-Time in the Health Services Department. (Cost Savings, Hospital Enterprise Fund I) 24-0573 Attachments:P300-26265 Signed P300 26265.pdf approved Page 26 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 Human Resources C.11 1. ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26263 to add one (1) full-time Senior Buyer (represented) position and one (1) full-time Buyer II (represented) position in the Public Works Department and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE budget adjustment No. BDA-24-00018 transferring $49,084 from the general fund to fund the positions. (100% General Fund) 24-0574 Attachments:PAF - Add Purchasing positions Budget_Amendment__FY_2023-24_-_BDA-24-00018 Purchasing Signed P300 26263.pdf approved Information and Technology C.11 2. APPROVE and ACKNOWLEDGE that, by its terms, the purchase order with 11:11 Systems, Inc. (as successor in interest to SunGard AS), pertaining to the renewal of DoIT’s IT systems and mainframe disaster recovery services and initially approved by the Board on February 6, 2024 (Item C.92), with an amount not to exceed of $70,000, does not terminate on the date previously specified in the Board action, but instead, terminates on June 30, 2025. (100% User Departments) 24-0575 approved Library C.11 3. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $5,000 from East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, for Rodeo Library services, pursuant to the local refinery Good Neighbor Agreement, for the period July 1 through December 31, 2024. (No County match) 24-0576 approved C.11 4. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Niche Academy, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for the renewal of a Niche Academy Online Learning Platforms subscription, for the period April 2, 2024 through April 2, 2025. (100% Library Fund) 24-0577 approved Page 27 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.11 5. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Baker & Taylor, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $46,720 for renewal of the PressReader, a digital, translatable magazine and newspaper, for the period December 1, 2023 through November 30, 2024. (100% Library Fund) 24-0578 approved C.11 6. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Califa Group in an amount not to exceed $13,594 for the renewal of the Skillsoft 2.0 and IT Pro Books subscription, for the period December 31, 2023 through December 30, 2024. (100% Library Fund) 24-0579 approved Probation/Reentry and Justice C.11 7. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with Strategies for Youth in an amount not to exceed $590,000 to provide the Policing the Teen Brain training program for interested law enforcement agencies in the County for the period October 1, 2023, through September 30, 2027. (100% Federal) 24-0580 approved C.11 8. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Probation Department, a purchase order with Clear Impact, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $25,000 to procure a subscription service for local community corrections community programs performance reporting for the period September 6, 2023 through September 6, 2024. (100% State) 24-0581 approved C.11 9. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with UKG Kronos Systems LLC, in an amount not to exceed $40,893 for timekeeping software and support services for the period December 20, 2023 through December 19, 2024. (100% General Fund) 24-0582 approved Public Defender C.12 0. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute a contract with Thomson Reuters West in an amount not to exceed $291,330 to provide print and online legal research and reference materials for the period of March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2029. (100% General Fund) 24-0583 approved Page 28 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.12 1. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Public Defender, a purchase order amendment with Caltronics Business Systems to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $315,000 for copier rentals and managed print services and to extend the term date through February 24, 2026. (100% General Fund) 24-0584 approved Public Works C.12 2. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Nicolaos Theophanous (dba Theophanous Structural Engineers), to extend the term through December 31, 2024 with no change to the payment limit, to provide on-call structural services for various County facilities projects, Countywide. (No fiscal impact) 24-0585 approved C.12 3. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with PreScience Corporation, effective December 31, 2023, to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $1,727,747 for construction management services for the Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement Project, and to extend the term from December 31, 2023 to December 31, 2024, Concord area. (89% Federal Highway Bridge Program Funds, 11% Local Road Funds) 24-0586 approved C.12 4. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a lease with Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (dba Kids at Work) to lease approximately 2,603 square feet in a County-owned building located at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, as requested by the Public Works Department, for a 10-year term beginning February 1, 2024, in exchange for rent in the amount of $800 per month and the continued operation of a childcare facility. (100% General Fund) 24-0587 Attachments:Kids At Work Lease - FInal approved C.12 5. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with DRT Grading & Paving, Inc ., to extend the term through January 31, 2025, with no change to the payment limit or remaining terms, for on-call pavement maintenance and repair services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. (No Fiscal Impact) 24-0588 approved Page 29 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.12 6. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract change order with Aztec Consultants, Inc . for Job Order Contract 021, effective February 27, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $2,900,000 to a new payment limit of $5,400,000 for additional construction services as allowed by Public Contract Code 20128.5, Countywide. (100% Various Funds) 24-0589 Attachments:Change Ord 1 Aztec Bondability Letter JOC 021 approved C.12 7. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to submit three grant applications to the US Department of Transportation Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity grant program for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 for the Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Project, Boulevard Way Complete Streets Study, and Bay Point Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Study, Saranap and Bay Point areas. (80% Federal Funds and 20% Local Road Funds) 24-0590 approved C.12 8. APPROVE correction to the Board’s January 9, 2024 approval (Item C.113) of a job order contract with The Gordian Group, Inc., (dba The Mellon Group), to correct contract provisions related to the consultant’s licensed software, and to refer to the correct contract term from March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2027, with an optional extension through February 28, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director. (100% Various Funds) 24-0591 approved C.12 9. APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Bay Point and Saranap areas. (100% State Department of Transportation Grant Funds) 24-0592 Attachments:CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap-signed.pdf approved C.13 0. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work, for routine maintenance and repair of existing road pavement, Countywide. (100% Local Road Funds) 24-0593 approved Page 30 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.13 1. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s) for various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work, for routine maintenance and repair of concrete structures within road and flood control right-of-way, Countywide. (100% Local Road and Flood Control Funds) 24-0594 approved C.13 2. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work for routine maintenance of existing road pavement, Countywide. (100% Local Road Funds) 24-0595 approved C.13 3. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s) for various Road Maintenance, Flood Control, and Facilities Maintenance Work to provide fencing services including, but not limited to, installation, repair, replacement, or removal of fences and gates. (100% Local Road, Flood Control, Airport, Special Revenue, and General Funds) 24-0596 approved C.13 4. ACCEPT the 2023 Semi-Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisition Acceptances dated July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023, approved by the Public Works Director as submitted, Discovery Bay and San Pablo areas. (100% Various Roads and Flood Control Funds) 24-0597 Attachments:7-1-23 - 12-31-23 Report approved C.13 5. RESCIND Resolution No. 2024-21 adopted on January 16, 2024 (C.92) and ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-48 granting a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305 for pipelines located in the unincorporated area of the County near Pacheco, Clayton, and Byron, as recommended by the Public Works Director. (100% Pipeline Franchise Fees) RES 2024-48 Attachments:Exhibit 1 adopted C.13 6. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-49 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive, on March 7, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-49 adopted Page 31 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.13 7. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-50 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-50 adopted C.13 8. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-51 for the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, Alamo area. (86% Alamo Area of Benefit Funds, 11% Transportation Development Act Funds, 3% Local Road Funds) RES 2024-51 Attachments:Attachment A to Resolution.pdf Attachment B to Resolution.pdf CP#24-04 NOE Miranda Ave TDA-signed.pdf adopted C.13 9. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-52 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue, on March 21, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of four utility poles, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-52 adopted C.14 0. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-61 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, Discovery Bay area. (38% Transportation Development Act Funds, 62% Local Road Funds) RES 2024-61 Attachments:Attachment A to Resolution - Timber Point Crosswalks.pdf Attachment B to Resolution - Timber Point Crosswalks.pdf CP#24-02 NOE Timber Point Crosswalk TDA-signed.pdf adopted Page 32 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.14 1. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-60 for the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, El Sobrante area. (31% Transportation Development Act Funds, 69% Local Road Funds) RES 2024-60 Attachments:Attachment A to Resolution.pdf Attachment B to Resolution.pdf CP#24-05 NOE and Figures Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements-signed.pdf adopted C.14 2. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-53 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, on April 13, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m., for the purpose of allowing participants in a 5k foot race to gather safely, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-53 adopted C.14 3. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-54 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street, on March 9, 2024 from 8:00 a.m. through 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of Rodeo Baseball Association Opening Day Parade, Rodeo area. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-54 adopted C.14 4. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-55 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road, on April 2, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-55 adopted C.14 5. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-56 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue, on March 1, 2024, from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) RES 2024-56 adopted Page 33 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.14 6. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-57 accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. for the 2023 Countywide Pavement Digouts Project, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Bay Point, Pacheco, Contra Costa Centre, Kirker Pass, and Lafayette areas. (100% SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Funds) RES 2024-57 Attachments:Recordable Resolution_2025 Signed Resolution 2024-57.pdf adopted C.14 7. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-59 establishing a rate of $30 per Equivalent Runoff Unit for Stormwater Utility Area 17 (Unincorporated County) for Fiscal Year 2024–2025 and requesting that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District adopt annual parcel assessments for drainage maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Countywide. (100% Stormwater Utility Area 17 Funds) RES 2024-59 adopted Risk Management C.14 8. RECEIVE report concerning the final settlement of Cara Kerby vs . Contra Costa County; and AUTHORIZE payment from the Workers' Compensation Internal Service Fund in an amount not to exceed $65,000 as recommended by the Director of Risk Management. (100% Workers’ Compensation Internal Service Fund) 24-0598 approved C.14 9. DENY claims filed by Hoda Abdolrazek, Ziad Abunie, Antoine Rapheal Sr. Anderson, Robert Brock, Rebecca Garza, Anne Hancock, Ashika Kanji, Doraiswami Ramesh, Cristina Sales, Heir of Michael J . Wright, and Karen Lee Scott. 24-0599 approved Sheriff C.15 0. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Sheriff's Deputy Vivian Eriksen to pay the County $1.00 for retired Sheriff’s Service Dog "Xena" on February 28, 2024. (No fiscal impact) 24-0600 approved Page 34 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 C.15 1. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Tek84, in an amount not to exceed $49,995, to service the Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner located at the Sheriff’s West County Detention Facility for the period February 8, 2024 to February 7, 2029. (100% General Fund) 24-0601 approved C.15 2. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc ., in an amount not to exceed $22,320, for the installation of automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-6 and hosted software system services, for the period March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2026. (100% General Fund) 24-0602 approved C.15 3. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute contracts with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Regents of the University of California, for use of the Sheriff's Range Facility for the period March 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (100% Participant fees) 24-0603 approved C.15 4. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a license agreement with Comcast IP Phone, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 annually, to provide subscriber data for the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services Community Warning System, starting March 1, 2024, until the termination of the agreement by either party. (100% General Fund) 24-0604 approved C.15 5. ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-58 authorizing the Sheriff Coroner, or designee, to apply for, accept and approve grant funding, including amendments and extensions, with the California Highway Patrol Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for fiscal years 2024-2026, with an initial amount of $169,700 for the purchase of new equipment for the Sheriff’s Forensic Services Toxicology Unit, for the initial period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026. (No County match) RES 2024-58 adopted Treasurer - Tax Collector C.15 6. ACCEPT the Treasurer's Quarterly Investment Report as of December 31, 2023, as recommended by the County Treasurer-Tax Collector. 24-0605 Attachments:Q4_2023 TOC_Final approved Page 35 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 GENERAL INFORMATION The Board meets in all its capacities pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 24-2.402. Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the Clerk of the Board to a majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 1025 Escobar Street, First Floor, Martinez, CA 94553, during normal business hours. All matters listed under CONSENT ITEMS are considered by the Board to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a member of the Board before the Board votes on the motion to adopt. Each member of the public will be allowed two minutes to comment on the entire consent agenda. Persons who wish to speak on matters set for PUBLIC HEARINGS will be heard when the Chair calls for public testimony. Each speaker during public testimony will be limited to two minutes. After public testimony, the hearing is closed and the matter is subject to discussion and action by the Board. Comments on matters listed on the agenda or otherwise within the purview of the Board of Supervisors can be submitted to the office of the Clerk of the Board via mail: Board of Supervisors, 1025 Escobar Street, First Floor, Martinez, CA 94553 or to clerkoftheboard@cob.cccounty.us. In the interest of facilitating the business of the Board, the total amount of time that a member of the public may use in addressing the Board on all agenda items is 10 minutes. Time limits for public speakers may be adjusted at the discretion of the Chair. The County will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Board meetings who contact the Clerk of the Board at least 24 hours before the meeting, at (925) 655-2000. Anyone desiring to submit an inspirational thought nomination for inclusion on the Board Agenda may contact the Office of the County Administrator or Office of the Clerk of the Board, 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez, California. Subscribe to receive to the weekly Board Agenda by calling the Office of the Clerk of the Board, (925) 655-2000 or using the County's on line subscription feature at the County’s Internet Web Page, where agendas and supporting information may also be viewed: www.contracosta.ca.gov DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS Pursuant to Government Code section 84308, members of the Board of Supervisors are disqualified and not able to participate in any agenda item involving contracts (other than competitively bid, labor, or personal employment contracts), franchises, discretionary land use permits and other entitlements if the Board member received, since January 1, 2023, more than $250 in campaign contributions from the applicant or contractor, an agent of the applicant or contractor, or any financially interested participant who actively supports or opposes the County’s decision on the agenda item. Members of the Board of Supervisors who have received, and applicants, contractors or their agents who have made, campaign contributions totaling more than $250 to a Board member since January 1, 2023, are required to disclose that fact for the official record of the subject proceeding. Disclosures must include the amount of the campaign contribution and identify the recipient Board member, and may be made either in writing to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors before the subject hearing or by verbal disclosure at the time of the hearing. Page 36 of 37 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes - Final February 27, 2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STANDING COMMITTEES For more information please visit the Board of Supervisors Standing Committees page here: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/8633/Board-of-Supervisors-Standing-Committees Airport Committee: June 6, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. Equity Committee: March 18, 2024 at 10:30 a.m. Family and Human Services Committee: March 25, 2024 at 10:30 a.m. Finance Committee: March 4, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. Head Start Advisory Committee: Special Meeting March 4, 2024 at 12:00 p.m. & March 18, 2024 at 9:00 a.m. Internal Operations Committee: March 11, 2024 at 11:00 a.m. Legislation Committee: March 25, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. Los Medanos Healthcare Operations Committee: March 11, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. Public Protection Committee: March 4, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. Sustainability Committee: March 18, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee: March 11, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. AGENDA DEADLINE: Thursday, 12 noon, 12 days before the Tuesday Board meetings . Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms Contra Costa County has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in its Board of Supervisors meetings and written materials. For a list of commonly used language that may appear in oral presentations and written materials associated with Board meetings, please visit https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/8464/Glossary-of-Agenda-Acronyms . Page 37 of 37 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0618 Name: Status:Type:Discussion Item Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 Title:HEARING to consider an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s denial of a 10-lot major subdivision at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road in the unincorporated Pleasant Hill area and to consider approving the project, including approving a vesting tentative map, approving a density bonus, adopting a mitigated negative declaration, and related actions. (County File No. CDSD20-09531) (Andy Byde – Applicant; Grayson Road LLC – Property; Andy Byde/Calibr Ventures, Inc. – Appellant). (Joseph Lawlor, Department of Conservation and Development) Attachments:1. CDSD20-09531 Findings and COAs, 2. Appeal Letter 01192024, 3. IS_MND and MMRP, 4. CPC and ZA Staff Reports, 5. Vesting Tentative Map, and Other Project Materials, 6. Public Comments, 7. Presentation CDSD20-09531 02272024, 8. Correspondence Received.pdf, 9. Applicant Presentation.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass 5:0 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Grayson Road Subdivision Project Appeal (County File CDSD20-09531) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) staff recommend that the Board of Supervisors: 1.OPEN the public hearing on an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s decision to deny a 10-lot major subdivision located at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill (County File #CDSD20-09531); RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing. 2.GRANT the appeal of Calibr Ventures. 3.FIND that the mitigated negative declaration prepared for the project adequately analyzes the project’s environmental impacts, that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the mitigated negative declaration reflects the County’s independent judgment and analysis. 4.ADOPT the March 24, 2023 mitigated negative declaration prepared for the project. 5. ADOPT the mitigation monitoring and reporting program prepared for the project. 6.APPROVE an eight percent density bonus (one additional unit), the requested concession to allow the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 installation of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb and bicycle lane striping along the project frontage in lieu of complete frontage improvements, and the requested waivers or reductions in development standards related to minimum lot size, average lot width, lot depth, and setbacks. 7.APPROVE the vesting tentative map for the project. 8.APPROVE a tree permit to allow removal of 97 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees. 9.APPROVE the attached findings in support of the project. 10.APPROVE the project conditions of approval. 11.DIRECT the Director of Conservation and Development to file a CEQA Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. 12.SPECIFY that the Department of Conservation and Development, located at 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA, is the custodian of the documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision of the Board of Supervisors is based. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant has paid the necessary application deposit and is obligated to pay supplemental fees to cover all additional costs associated with the application process. No fiscal impact to the County is expected. BACKGROUND: Project Background: This hearing is an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s January 10, 2024 decision to deny a vesting tentative map for the Grayson Road Subdivision Project, County File CDSD20-09531, subdividing a 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. The project is a density bonus subdivision and incorporates waivers and concessions to County General Plan, Zoning and Subdivision standards as provided for in the State’s density bonus law. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code- protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees. This application was heard at October 2, 2023, and October 16, 2023, Zoning Administrator hearings, where the Zoning Administrator received testimony from the applicant, neighbors, other interested parties, and representatives of the applicant. At the October 16, 2023 hearing, the Zoning Administrator approved the vesting tentative map for the project with minor modifications to the recommended conditions of approval. On October 26, 2023, neighboring property owners filed a timely appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision. The County Planning Commission heard the appeal on January 10, 2024. Though Staff recommended denying the appeal and approving the project, the CPC voted (5-2) to grant the appeal and deny the project. On January 19, 2024, the applicant appealed the CPC’s decision to deny the project. Project Description: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021-square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. Running southwest to northwest along the southern boundary of the project site is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek. The proposed project does not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees. The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. The applicant has requested and qualifies for a density bonus of 8 percent (one additional unit), a requested concession to allow the installation of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb and bicycle lane striping along the project frontage in lieu of complete frontage improvements, and requested waivers or reductions in development standards, as described in more detail below, as authorized under State Density Bonus Law. Applicable State Law State Density Bonus Law The State Density Bonus Law (Government Code, Sections 65915-65918) incentivizes the building of affordable housing by granting developers a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density, as well as other incentives or concessions, waivers of development standards, and parking ratio reductions in return for a commitment to provide affordable housing as part of a development project. If a developer meets the requirements of the Law, a local agency must award a density bonus. A density bonus is available to housing development projects that comply with at least one of the following criteria: ·At least 5 percent of the housing units are restricted to very low-income households. ·At least 10 percent of the housing units are restricted to lower-income households. ·At least 10 percent of the housing units in a for-sale common interest development are restricted to moderate-income households. The amount of density bonus depends upon and increases with the percentage of the development made available as affordable housing. In calculating the applicable density bonus “all density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number,” and “each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number.” CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 3 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 In addition to the density bonus, a qualifying development is also entitled to a certain number of concessions or incentives. A concession or incentive is defined as a reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements, such as a reduction in setback or minimum square footage requirements; or approval of mixed-use zoning; or other regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. A requested concession or incentive may not be denied unless the local agency makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A)The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. (B)The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households. (C)The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. The State Density Bonus Law also provides that the local agency may not apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the permitted density (including the density bonus) or with the requested concessions or incentives. That is, a developer may request, and the local agency must grant, an unlimited number of waivers or reductions of development standards if application of the standard would physically preclude construction of a qualifying development at the density and with the concessions or incentives permitted under the State Density Bonus Law. Housing Accountability Act The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) (Government Code, Section 65589.5) provides additional safeguards for housing development projects. When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the housing development project’s application is determined to be complete, the local agency may disapprove the project or impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density only if the decision is based upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist: (A) The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. A “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. (B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified, other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density. For purposes of the HAA, the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision. Density Bonus Request CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 4 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 The applicant requests a density bonus and proposes to restrict one lot (Lot 1) for affordable housing and to make it available for sale to a moderate-income household. ·Project site:3.05 gross acreage 2.76 net acres (proposed right-of-way and private road area are deducted) ·General Plan SL Land Use Designation allows 1.0 - 2.9 units per acre ·Base density: (2.76 net acres) * (2.9 units per acre) = 8.004 units ·Percent of units made available for sale to moderate-income households: (1 unit ) / (8.004 units) = 12.49%, rounded up to 13% By making 13% of base units available for sale to moderate-income households, the project qualifies for an 8% density bonus. ·Density Bonus Calculation: (9 units, rounded up from 8.004) * (0.08) = 0.72 units, fractional unit rounded to 1 unit; 9 units + 1 unit = 10 units The project also is entitled to one concession or incentive. As a concession, the applicant requests the installation of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb and bicycle lane striping along the project frontage in lieu of complete frontage improvements. The applicant has also requested waivers or reductions from R-15 development standards that will allow for: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4- 10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Site/Area Description The 3.05-gross-acre project site is located on the south side of Grayson Road, opposite the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The roughly L-shaped project site is comprised of two parcels: a northern parcel that fronts on Grayson Road, and a southern parcel that is bound by Grayson Creek to the south and east. Grayson Creek runs roughly east-west along the southern boundary of the project site, then takes a northward bend forming the east boundary. Other private properties with single-family residences abut the property to the north and west. The immediate surrounding area is representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County. Properties along Grayson Road are predominantly developed with single-family residences. Within a half-mile radius, developed parcels range in size from 4,000 square feet to 68,700 square feet, with a median size of approximately 13,000 square feet. The larger vicinity includes a mix of neighborhood- residential uses including single-family residences, churches, schools, and parks. Regional access to the site is provided via I-680 by way of Gregory Lane and Taylor Boulevard and is also provided via State Route (SR) 24 by way of Pleasant Hill Road/Taylor Boulevard. Local access to the project site would be provided via Grayson Road and a new private internal street. General Plan Consistency CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 5 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 The proposed project would conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. As described above, the project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. The density of the proposed project would be 3.62 dwelling units per net acre, which would be deemed consistent with the SL Land Use designation density range of 1 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre as a result of the utilization of a Density Bonus. The applicable density range would ordinarily result in a maximum of 9 units on the site. However, due to application of the density bonus, the maximum development capacity of the site is 10 units. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. The County’s land use compatibility standards contained in Figure 11-6 of the Noise Element, ambient noise environments are considered normally acceptable for new single-family residential land use development with noise levels ranging up to 60 A-weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)/day/night average sound level (Ldn). Environments with noise levels from 55 dBA to70 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered conditionally acceptable for new single-family land use development; and such development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Environments with noise levels from 70 dBA to 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered normally unacceptable for new single-family land use development, and clearly unacceptable for levels above 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Two noise measurement surveys were taken to determine existing noise levels at the project site. The dominant noise source in the project vicinity was found to be traffic noise on adjacent roadways and lawnmowing. The noise survey documented that existing ambient noise levels on the project site range from 61 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq), as measured at approximately 20 feet from the edge of Grayson Road, to 47 dBA Leq at the project boundary adjoining 2043 Mohawk Drive property. The noise measurement survey files are included in the FCS Draft IS/MND report. These noise measurements were taken during the peak noise hours of the day, and represent the expected highest hourly average noise levels that are experienced on the project site. Resulting 24-hour average noise levels would be even lower when averaged with quieter hours of the day. Therefore, the existing ambient noise environment of the project site is within the conditionally acceptable range for new residential land use development. For conditionally acceptable noise environments, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems, will normally suffice. Zoning Consistency The Zoning District for the project site is Single-Family Residential (R-15). The project, as proposed, would not be consistent with the R-15 development standards with respect to minimum lot size, lot width, lot depth, or setbacks. However, the applicant has requested waivers or reductions of these development standards as allowed under the State Density Bonus law. The applicant has requested waivers or reductions of development standards pertaining to: (a)a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 6 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 (b)a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 (instead of 100 feet); (c)a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; (d)a reduction in minimum front yard and side yard setback and (e)a waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls. The proposed lot sizes, lot width, depth, and setbacks, are shown in the following table. The applicant is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the R-15 development standards would physically preclude the development of the project at the permitted density with the proposed one moderate income unit. With the requested waivers and reductions, the project would be considered consistent with the R-15 single- family residential zoning district. Lot #Area ( 15,0 00 Sq. Ft.) Depth (100 Ft. Min.) Average Width (100 Ft. Min.) Front Yard Setback (20 feet) Side Yard Setback (25 feet aggregate, no yard less than 10 feet) Retaining Walls 6’ or less Lot 1 7,347 87.45 84.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 2 22,460 331 67.85 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 3 15,236 270 56.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 4 14,257 144 99.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 5 14,713 195 75.45 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 6 11,261 163 69.09 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 7 11,360 166 68.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 8 13,388 185 72.37 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 9 13,655 173 78.93 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 10 14,013 220 63.70 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 7 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance The County Tree Ordinance provides for the protection of certain trees by regulating tree removal while allowing for reasonable development of private property. Project design includes the avoidance of approximately 30 percent of the on-site trees, all other trees will be removed and replaced. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodland in-kind and on- site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. This is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance The project is subject to County’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 822-4). Pursuant to the Ordinance, a residential development of five or more for-sale units shall require at least 15 percent of the for-sale units to be developed and sold as affordable units. At least twenty percent of the inclusionary units shall be sold at an affordable price to lower-income households. The remaining inclusionary units shall be sold to moderate- income families at an affordable price. Under the Ordinance, the project is required to provide 1.35 inclusionary units (9 total base units x 0.15 = 1.35 units). The applicant submitted a revised project proposal, dated March 25, 2022, that included an Inclusionary Housing Plan and the density bonus request that proposed to construct one for-sale moderate-income inclusionary unit (affordable to households with an income up to 120% of Area Median Income) on Lot 1 of the property. The unit on Lot 1 will be an approximately 3,097-square-foot single-family detached home consisting of four bedrooms. The one moderate-income unit is proposed to satisfy the project’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements as well as qualify the project for the requested density bonus. The applicant must comply with both the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and State Density Bonus law with respect to development of the one moderate-income unit, and the most restrictive requirements would apply. The Applicant has proposed to pay a partial in-lieu fee for the fractional 0.35 inclusionary unit. The current calculation of the partial in-lieu fee for the fractional inclusionary unit is $15,444.00. The final calculation of the in-lieu fee will be calculated upon payment. This in-lieu fee is non- refundable and non-transferable. Traffic and Circulation Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan requires a traffic impact analysis of any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak period trip generation rates of 1.0 trip per dwelling unit for single-family residences, the proposed project consisting of the ten-lot subdivision, and the future construction of 10 single-family residence (8 net new units) would generate an additional eight AM and eight PM new peak period trips, and therefore, is not required to have a project-specific traffic impact analysis. Since the project would yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, the proposed project would not conflict with the circulation system in the Pleasant Hill area. The proposed subdivision project includes a new 28-foot-wide access road which would permit two 10-foot travel lanes and an 8-foot wide parking area on one side of the street. Additionally, a 5-foot wide, monolithic, elevated sidewalk would be constructed adjacent to the new road to provide access for pedestrians and persons with disabilities within the project. Along the project frontage, the project will provide a reconstructed asphalt- concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping in-lieu of complete frontage improvements. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 8 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 The Density Bonus application submitted to the County has requested that the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. Improved frontage improvements are defined as curb, gutter pan, and a sidewalk. No complete frontage improvements exist along the southern portion of Grayson Road, from the intersection of Reliez Valley Road to the west and Heritage Hills Drive to the East (that road segment is in excess of 2,000 feet in length). Complete frontage improvements would be prohibitively expensive given the length of the project frontage (354 feet), the required grading, tree removal, and utility requirements. In addition, there is no sidewalk along the southern side of Grayson Road to connect with, in 1,000 feet in either direction. The adjacent properties that front along Grayson Road are not expected to develop in the future. Finally, existing Grayson Road has adequate width to support two travel lanes, parking, and a bike lane. Therefore the overall the surrounding circulation system is consistent with the Complete Streets policy. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right of way for each category of users be incorporated into all planning, funding, design, approval, and implementation processes for any construction, reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, operations, alteration, or repair of streets (including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system), except that specific infrastructure for a given category of users may be excluded if an exemption is approved via the process set forth in section C.1 of the policy. The policy applies to both publicly owned roads/land and private developments (or redevelopment areas). Additionally, the County General Plan includes many policies promoting pedestrian and bicycle facilities. As designed, the project would be consistent with this policy. Drainage The proposed project would comply with applicable water quality and discharge requirements. The proposed project would add an estimated 50,825 square feet of new impervious surface area. The C.3 requirements stipulate that projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface must incorporate specific measures to reduce runoff, such as dispersion of runoff to vegetated areas, use of pervious pavement, installation of cisterns, and installation of bioretention facilities or planter boxes. Implementation of these measures would be required as a condition of approval. An existing 24” reenforced concrete pipe within Grayson Road currently collects stormwater runoff from upstream properties. The 24” storm drainpipe connects to two 6x6 concrete boxes under Grayson Creek and discharges water directly to Grayson Creek. Most runoff on the project site would be directed to a 674-cubic-foot bioretention basin located adjacent to Lot 2 for treatment. Once treated, runoff would be directed to the public storm drainpipe beneath Grayson Road. A portion of the runoff would bypass this treatment system and instead enter the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24-inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff, even in a 100-year storm event. This would ensure that project runoff would not exceed existing conditions. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 9 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: the CDFW and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letter were received from individuals. All comments were summarized and responded to in the October 2, 2023 Zoning Administrator hearing staff report for the project. County Planning Commission An appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve the project was heard by the County Planning Commission on January 10, 2024. After receiving public testimony, the CPC voted 5-2 to: grant the appeal; decline to adopt the mitigated negative declaration; find that the proposed project, including the lack of sidewalk, curb, and gutter along the project frontage, would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety; and deny the project. Appeal of the County Planning Commission’s Decision On January 19, 2024, Bryan W. Wenter, a representative of the applicant Calibr Ventures, submitted a timely appeal of the County Planning Commission’s decision to deny the approval of the project. A summary of the appeal points and staff responses are provided below. A copy of the appeal letter is attached to this report. Health and Safety Basis for Denial The appellant argues that the Planning Commission's denial of the housing development project lacked a lawful basis, specifically regarding their finding that the lack of sidewalk, curb, and gutter along the project frontage would have a negative impact on public health and safety. Staff agrees that project adequately addressed health and safety concerns, and the lack of sidewalk facilities along the project frontage should not have been a basis for denial of the project. The impacts to health and safety related to the installation of frontage improvements was analyzed in the Initial Study and in the October 2, 2023 Zoning Administrator Staff Report responses to Shikany Comment 7, Shikany Comment 67, Shikany Comment 76 and West Comment 1. As stated in these responses, the County’s Complete Streets policy requires streets to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right-of-way for each category of users. The IS/MND describes that the proposed project would comply with this requirement through the installation of alternative frontage improvements. Specifically, the project would include bicycle lane facilities along the project frontage. Furthermore, the project qualifies for a concession under the State Density Bonus Law, which entitles it to CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 10 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 alternative frontage improvements, including asphalt-concrete curb and bicycle lane striping on Grayson Road. The State Density Bonus Law allows such concessions unless the County rejects them with adequate justification. Here, the alternative improvements ensure reasonably safe pedestrian and bicycle travel. As stated in the October 2, 2023 Zoning Administrator Staff Report, the Density Bonus Law provides for regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs. (Gov. Code § 65915(d)(1)). The Density Bonus Law puts the burden of rejecting any proposed incentives or concessions on the County and requires the County to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the County makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A)The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c). (B)The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- income and moderate-income households. (C)The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. Furthermore, the project applicant has committed to installing sidewalk improvements on the opposite side of Grayson Road, addressing a pre-existing gap and benefiting future residents. In light of the above, staff believe the project denial lacked substantial evidence and should be reconsidered. CPC Appeal Hearing Date The appellant alleges that the CPC hearing for the project failed to comply with the 60-day timeframe outlined in the Permit Streamlining Act and Subdivision Map Act. However, the hearing was held on the first available date within the timeframe permitted by the relevant statutes, taking into account both the applicant's scheduling constraints due to holidays and other limitations affecting CPC meeting availability. Additionally, both the applicant and the County mutually agreed to hold the CPC hearing on January 10, 2024. Housing Accountability Act (HAA) Subdivision (j) of the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) imposes stricter limitations on disapproving or reducing the density of compliant housing projects. To qualify, projects must adhere to "applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards." Disapproval under these circumstances requires written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence: 1.Specific, adverse impact on public health or safety: This impact must be significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable, demonstrably linked to objective, identified standards existing when the application was deemed complete. 2.Absence of feasible mitigation: No reasonable solutions exist to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact without project disapproval or density reduction. As discussed above, the adverse health impacts from the project have been thoroughly reviewed during the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 11 of 12 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0618,Version:1 preparation of the Initial Study for the project and during consideration of the project’s concession request. Based on the evidence in the record, the project would not have a specific, adverse impact upon health and safety. Thus, staff believe the basis for the CPC’s denial of the project does not meet the requirements for disapproving a project under the HAA. Constitutional Concerns The appellant alleges that the Planning Commission’s denial of the project infringes on their constitutional rights. They argue that denying the project due to preexisting deficiencies on Grayson Road would violate the "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" principles established in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard. As described above, the project adequately addressed health and safety concerns along the project frontage on Grayson Road. And the project applicant has committed to installing sidewalk improvements on the opposite side of Grayson Road, addressing a pre-existing gap and benefiting future residents. Considering the current project's scope, the proposed bicycle lane facilities along the project frontage and sidewalks on the opposite side of Grayson Road comply with the requirements for projects of similar size. Conclusion and Staff Recommendation The development of the proposed ten- lot subdivision aligns with the surrounding neighborhood, avoids negative environmental impacts, and adheres to applicable regulations. The project complies with the State Density Bonus Law, utilizing its incentives to offer affordable housing without exceeding allowable density limits. While the project requires some development standard waivers, an Initial Study confirmed minimal environmental impacts, mitigated through specific measures. Therefore, constructing housing on these parcels presents a compatible, compliant, and responsible solution. Staff recommends that the Board grant the appeal and approve the project. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Denying the housing project could have significant negative consequences, including missing an opportunity to incrementally address the need for housing on an underutilized site and potential for legal challenges. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 12 of 12 powered by Legistar™ FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09531: ANDY BYDE, CALIBR VENTURES (APPLICANT) GRAYSON ROAD LLC (OWNER) FINDINGS I. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffic: Traffic engineers and planners use the concepts of Level of Service (LOS) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) to qualitatively describe traffic conditions. Additionally, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Growth Management Plan, the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Action Plan, and the County of Contra Costa (County) General Plan establish measures of effectiveness and requirements for the analysis and disclosure of circulation impacts associated with new land developments. Potential circulation impacts may be expected, and traffic impact analyses are required for projects that generate more than 100 net new peak-hour trips. A project generating less than 100 peak-hour trips generally will not create or exacerbate any current traffic patterns. Using standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation trip rates, the eight additional housing unit project will generate eight AM and eight PM gross peak-hour trips. At this expected rate, the cumulative effect to local roadways is negligible. Senate Bill (SB) 743 established a change in the metric to be applied for determining traffic impacts associated with development projects. Rather than the delay-based criteria associated with a Level of Service (LOS) analysis, the increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) associated with a project is now the basis for determining impacts. Contra Costa County adopted the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, which includes a VMT policy on June 23, 2020. Pursuant to the County guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and do not require a project specific traffic impact analysis. The project proposes eight additional residential units which is under the County guidelines VMT screening criteria threshold. Therefore, the impacts from the project are expected to be inconsequential. 2. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water quantity can be provided. The subject property is within the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) service area. In an agency comment letter for the project, EBMUD stated that water service for the project could be accommodated. Thus, adequate water quantity is available to the project. 3. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires that new development demonstrate that adequate sanitary sewer service is available. The subject property is within the H. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) service area. In an agency comment letter received from CCCSD, the district stated sanitary sewer service is available for the project and that the proposed project would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity. 4. Fire Protection: The fire protection standards under the GMP require that a fire station be within one and one-half miles of development in urban, suburban and central business CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 2 of 30 district areas, or requires that automatic fire sprinkler systems be installed to satisfy this standard. The project site is within the Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District jurisdiction, and the project requires the Fire District’s review and approval prior to building permits being issued to ensure compliance with all fire codes and regulations. Compliance with all requirements suggests that the project will satisfy the GMP fire protection standards. CCCFPD, has 36 stations serving the County, including two stations within two miles of the project site. The nearest station to the project site is Station 5 at 205 Boyd Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.72 miles from the project site. Thus, sprinklers would be required for the residences on the property. 5. Public Protection: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions of approval will requires that prior to the recording of the parcel map, the owner of the property shall participate in establishing a special tax for the parcel created by this subdivision. The collected tax money will be used to augment existing police services to accommodate for the incremental increase in population as a result of this subdivision project. 6. Parks and Recreation: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions fo approval will requires the project proponent to pay applicable Park Impact in-lieu fees for the new residences. These fees, in conjunction with all other Park Dedication fees collected for development within the County, will be used in part to purchase new park land and upgrade existing community parks as determined appropriate by the Board of Supervisors. 7. Flood Control and Drainage: The project is required to meet collect and convey requirements of the County Subdivision Ordinance Title 9, by constructing the necessary drainage improvements, or obtaining necessary exceptions to the code. The applicant must also comply with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, Title 10, for stormwater treatment. The new drainage improvements will both meet stormwater discharge requirements for stormwater treatment, while also accommodating all rainwater runoff generated by the project, as required by Title 9. Exemptions to allow private maintenance of drainage facilities is appropriate given the necessity of onsite detention. II. Tentative Map Findings 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general plan required by law. Project Finding: The proposed project will conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. The project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 3 of 30 that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. Each of the following factors has also been evaluated and found to be consistent: the extent to which the project is consistent with General Plan policies pertaining to compatibility of land uses; compliance with principles of the Urban Limit Line and Measure C-1990, protection of open spaces; and protection of water quality; and found no evidence of inconsistencies. Additionally, the projected related traffic is not anticipated to negatively affect local traffic patterns or significantly diminish the Level of Service of key intersections in the area or exceed VMT thresholds. The tentative parcel map for this subdivision is consistent with the applicable goals and policies as found in the County 2005-2020 General Plan. Therefore, based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the tentative map is consistent with the County General Plan. 2. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. Project Finding: As required by the conditions of approval, the project does not pose any significant traffic impacts and must comply with the “collect and convey” requirements and design standards for construction of public roads. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant is required to contribute fees for parks and recreation, school districts, child care and police services. Payment of these fees along with compliance with the applicable California Building Code will fulfill all obligations related to construction of the project. Therefore, based on the proposal, no physical circumstances would restrict the developer from completing the project. III. Tree Permit Findings Required Finding: The Zoning Administrator is satisfied that necessary factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree permit have been satisfied. Project Finding: An Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, identified 117 code-protected trees in the project work area. The report recommended removal of 97 trees to accommodate the proposed development and called for the protection of 17 trees with work within their dripline. The Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance states that the director of the department may attach conditions to ensure compliance with the chapter and code. These conditions may include a requirement to replace any or all trees on a comparable ratio of either size or quantity. To meet this requirement the applicant would be required to submit and implement a landscaping and irrigation plan that includes replacement of the trees that have been removed. Trees planted will be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits and will be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, or the maximum that can be practicably accommodated on the site. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 4 of 30 IV. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an initial study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: California Department of Fish Wildlife and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letters were received from individuals. No additional impacts were identified in these comments and all comments are summarized and responded to in the project staff report. Notice of the proposed project was sent to Native American tribes, as applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1. A Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission, dated October 28, 2015, was used to identify tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. No requests for consultation were received. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD20-09531 1. Approval of the Vesting Tentative Map for a 10 Residential-Lot Subdivision; is generally based on the following documents: • Application and materials received on January 13, 2020; • Revised Project Description Dated March 25, 2022; • Revised Vesting Tentative Map for Subdivision CDSD20-09531, received January 28, 2022; • Architectural Plans received December 15, 2021; • Hydrology And Storm Water Detention Report prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 5 of 30 • Storm Water Control Plan prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; • Grayson Road Inclusionary Housing Plan submitted September 18, 2023; • Grayson Road Density Bonus Proposal submitted September 18, 2023; • Geotechnical Report prepared by ENGEO Incorporated dated October 4, 2019; • Archeological Survey and Historical Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Archaeological/Historical Consultants, dated February 2007; • Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020; • Biological Resource Analysis Addendum prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC., dated December 2022; 2. The concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, is approved, as shown in the Vesting Tentative Map received on January 28, 2022. The applicant shall construct curb, 5-foot sidewalk, necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage, and necessary transitions along the north side of Grayson Road, beginning at the existing sidewalk terminus opposite the project site and continuing eastward to the west side of Buttner Road at its intersection with Grayson Road, culminating with an ADA-compliant ramp at the intersection. These requirements may be modified as necessary to conform to the City of Pleasant Hill’s standards. 3. The waivers to development standards is Approved, as shown on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map received January 28, 2022 to allow: a. A reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; b. A reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; c. A reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and d. Reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks to residences (20 feet to garages), and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls 6 feet or less. 4. This permit authorizes the development of ten lots on the subject property as generally identified in the CDSD20-09531 vesting tentative map and documents referenced above. 5. A Tree Permit to allow removal of 97 code-protected trees, and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees, as shown in the Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020, is Approved. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 6 of 30 Indemnification 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 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 br ought within the time period provided 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. Application Costs 7. The Major Subdivision application was subject to an initial deposit of $7,525.00 that was paid with the application submittal, plus time and material costs if the application review expenses exceed the initial deposit. Any additional fee due must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit, or 60 days of the effective date of this permit, whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance and final file preparation. Pursuant to Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Resolution Number 2013/340, where a fee payment is over 60 days past due, the application shall be charged interest at a rate of ten percent (10%) from the date of approval. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. Compliance Report Prior to Filing the Parcel Map 8. At least 45 days prior to filing of the Parcel Map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide a permit compliance report to the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) for review and approval. The report shall identify all conditions of approval that are administered by the CDD. The report shall document the measures taken by the applicant to satisfy all relevant conditions. Copies of the permit conditions may be obtained from the CDD. Unless otherwise indicated, the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the applicable conditions of this report prior to filing the Final Map. The permit compliance review is subject to staff time and materials charges, with an initial deposit of $2,000 which shall be paid at the time of submittal of the compliance report. Fencing 9. Prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, a fencing plan program shall be submitted to CDD for the review and approval. The approved program shall be attached to the CC&Rs. CC&Rs 10. Prior to recording the Final Map, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall be submitted to CDD for review and approval. This document shall include the maintenance obligation requirements of Public Works condition(s) of approval. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 7 of 30 Park Dedication Fees 11. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of Community Development Division (CDD) that all Park Dedication fees have been paid for the subdivision. Child Care Fees 12. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of CDD that all child care facility fees have been paid for the subdivision. Police Services Fees 13. Election for Establishment of a Police Services District to Augment Police Services: Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, 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 per parcel annual amount (with appropriate future CPI adjustment) established at the time of voting by the Board of Supervisors. The election to provide for the tax shall be completed prior to filing the Final Map. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of holding the election, payable at the time the election is requested by the owner. Allow a minimum of three to four months for processing. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance 14. The applicant shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, the project proponent shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. Aesthetics 15. Thirty days prior to applying for a building permit for new residence, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: • All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the subject property or road. • Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the subject property. (Mitigation Monitoring (MM) Aesthetics 1) CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 8 of 30 Air Quality 16. The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during the project and shall be included on all construction plans: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material to and from the site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations (MM Air Quality 1) Biological Resources 17. If it is determined that additional native trees can be protected in place while still achieving project objectives (as determined by the project Arborist in coordination with the Construction Manager and the project proponent), the project proponent will determine if additional trees can be saved based upon the potential impacts from the grading to the root structure of the trees by “field-fit” grading activities to the greatest extent practicable to conduct such avoidance. 18. In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS- Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 9 of 30 seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. (MM Biology 1) 19. All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non- native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, co ast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 2) Trees shall be planted prior to requesting a final inspection on the residential building permit for each lot. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to removal of trees or prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a security that is acceptable to the CDD. The bond shall include the amount of the approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security: The County ordinance requires that the applicant pay fees to cover all staff time and material costs of staff for processing the landscape improvement security. At the time of submittal of the security, the applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $200. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 10 of 30 CDD determines that the tree(s) intended to be protected has been damaged, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. Annual monitoring of the mitigation trees shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during an initial establishment period. During annual monitoring, a minimum of 80% of the mitigation trees shall be alive and healthy (as demonstrated by growth and fruiting, as appropriate). If at any point during annual monitoring, survival and health drop below the minimum health requirement (80% healthy trees), an assessment of cause(s) for this health failure shall be provided by the qualified biologist, and remedial actions shall be implemented. If survival drops below 80%, trees will be replaced in-kind and at the same location, unless a different species or location is prescribed by the qualified biologist as part of remedial recommendations. Annual monitoring will occur up to 10 years, but may cease before then if the above success criteria are met during five consecutive years. 20. Prior to recordation of a final map, a Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of CDD. The Final Landscaping Plan shall include the tree restitution required by Mitigation Measure Biology 2, and be consistent shall conform to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County’s Ordinance, if one is adopted. Prior to final building inspection, a completed WELO Part II – Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to CDD staff for review and approval. All landscaping shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, landscaping plans shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. 21. If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 11 of 30 whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. (MM Biology 3) 22. A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. (MM Biology 4) 23. Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre- construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red-legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground- disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. (MM Biology 5) 24. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. (MM Biology 6) 25. Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 7) 26. For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 12 of 30 a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special- status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: a. To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. b. Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. c. If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artificial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. (MM Biology 8) 27. During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 13 of 30 c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. f. All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wpcontent- /uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf Cultural Resources 28. All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 14 of 30 requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. (MM Cultural Resources 1) 29. In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: a. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. b. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. (MM Cultural Resources 1) Geotechnical Report 30. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 15 of 30 general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. (MM Geology 1) 31. The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. (MM Geology 2) Noise 32. To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: a. The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. b. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. c. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. d. At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. e. The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. (MM Noise 1) Construction Restrictions and Requirements 33. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the project, the project developer or contractor CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 16 of 30 shall mail a notice to each adjacent residential property providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. 34. The applicant shall comply with the following restrictions and requirements, which shall be stated on the face of the construction drawings: A. Unless approved otherwise via prior authorization from the Zoning Administrator for special circumstances, construction activities are limited to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and are prohibited on the calendar dates that the following state and federal holidays are observed: New Year’s Day (State and Federal) Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. (State and Federal) Washington’s Birthday (Federal) Lincoln’s Birthday (State) Presidents’ Day (State and Federal) Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day (State and Federal) Juneteenth National Independence Day (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 details on the actual date the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal holidays: http://www.opm.gov/fedhol California holidays: http://www.edd.ca.gov/payroll_taxes/State_Holidays.htm B. Transport of heavy equipment and trucks is limited to weekdays between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M., and is prohibited on weekends and the aforementioned state and federal holidays. C. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to adjacent properties. This shall be communicated to project-related contractors. D. Construction equipment and materials shall be stored onsite to the maximum extent practicable. E. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 17 of 30 F. Any debris found outside the site shall immediately be collected and deposited in appropriate receptacles. G. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers that are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences as possible. Contingency Restitution Should Altered Trees Be Damaged 35. Trees to be Preserved but Altered – Pursuant to the conclusions of the arborist report, proposed improvements within the root zone of trees noted on the site plan to be preserved have been determined to be feasible and still allow for preservation provided that the recommendations of the arborist are followed. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 816- 6.1204 of the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, to address the possibility that construction activity nevertheless damages these trees, the applicant shall provide the County with a security (e.g. bond, cash deposit) to be submitted prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, whichever occurs first, to allow for replacement of trees intended to be preserved that are significantly damaged by construction activity. The security shall be based on: a. Extent of Possible Restitution Improvements – The planting of 17, 15-gallon trees, which shall include California native species. in the vicinity of the affected trees, or equivalent planting contribution, and subject to prior review and approval of CDD. b. Determination of Security Amount: The security shall submitted for each lot and provide for all of the following costs: i. Preparation of landscape/irrigation plan by a licensed landscape architect or arborist, which shall comply with the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County Ordinance, if one is adopted; ii. Labor and materials estimate for planting the potential number of trees and related irrigation improvements that may be required, prepared by a licensed landscape contractor; and iii. An additional 20% of the total of the above amounts to address inflation costs. c. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security – The County Ordinance requires that the applicant cover all time and material costs of staff for processing a tree protection security. The Applicant shall pay an initial fee deposit of $200 at time of submittal of a security. d. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree intended to be protected has been damaged by development activity, and CDD determines that the applicant has CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 18 of 30 not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution of the damaged trees, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. Debris Recovery 36. At least 15 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit the developer shall submit Construction Waste Management Plan, which identifies approved methods to comply with CalGreen requirement to recycle and/or salvage for reuse construction and demolition waste materials generated at the jobsite. Prior to Final Inspection, developer shall submit Final Report containing information and supporting documentation of the above-mentioned requirement. Steet Names 37. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, proposed name(s) shall be submitted for review by the Department of Conservation and Development, GIS/Mapping Section. Alternate street names should be submitted. The Final Map cannot be certified by CDD without the approved street names. Will Serve Letters 38. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from East Bay Municipal Utility District shall be submitted to CDD. 39. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from Central Contra Costa Sanitary District shall be submitted to CDD. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT (HCI) DIVISION, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21- 09581 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 40. This project is subject to County Ordinance Code, Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Terms and definitions regarding the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance are pursuant to this chapter. Pursuant to Section 822-4.402(b) of the County Ordinance Code, a residential development of five or more for-sale units shall require at least fifteen percent of the for-sale units to be developed and sold as affordable units. At least twenty percent of the inclusionary units shall be sold at an affordable price to lower-income households. The remaining inclusionary units shall be sold to moderate-income families at an affordable price. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 19 of 30 For-Sale Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee 41. The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 1.35 affordable units (9 total base units x 0.15 of total = 1.35 units) for the project. The Applicant has submitted an Inclusionary Housing Plan dated March 25, 2022, and proposes constructing one for-sale moderate income inclusionary unit (affordable to households making up to 120% Area Median Income) on Lot 1 of the property. The unit on Lot 1 is an approximately 3,097 square-foot single-family detached home consisting of four bedrooms. The one moderate-income unit proposed for compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements is the same moderate-income unit required for compliance with the Density Bonus request. This unit may be referenced as inclusionary unit, density bonus unit, or both in these conditions. The requirements for the one moderate-income unit must comply with both the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and State Density Bonus law, and the most restrictive requirements would apply. The Applicant has proposed to pay a partial in-lieu fee for the fractional 0.35 inclusionary unit, and the County has accepted this proposal. The current calculation of the partial in- lieu fee for the fractional inclusionary unit is $15,444.00. The final calculation of the in-lieu fee will be calculated upon payment. This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non- transferable. A partial in- lieu fee of $15,444.00 will be paid for the fractional .35 unit (.35 = 26% of the fee total of $59,401. 26% of this fee = $15,444.00) Density Bonus Request 42. The Applicant submitted a revised project description which included a density bonus request dated March 25, 2022. The Applicant proposed constructing one moderate- income unit, constituting 13 percent of the total for-sale units in the development. Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant may request one project concession or incentive for providing 13 percent (one unit) for moderate-income units of the total units within the for-sale housing development. The applicant requested the concession to not have to complete frontage improvements. The County accepted the Applicant’s request to not complete frontage improvements. To fully improve the property frontage would result in significant costs that could preclude the construction of the development at its proposed density including the moderate unit. The applicant shall construct curb, 5-foot sidewalk, necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage, and necessary transitions along the north side of Grayson Road, beginning at the existing sidewalk terminus opposite the project site and continuing eastward to the west side of Buttner Road at its intersection with Grayson Road, culminating with an ADA- compliant ramp at the intersection. These requirements may be modified as necessary to conform to the City of Pleasant Hill’s standards. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 20 of 30 Density Bonus – Reduction in Development Standards Pursuant to Government Code 65915(e), the Applicant proposed a waiver or reduction of the following development standards: • Lot Area – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 15,000 square feet, proposed lot sizes ranges from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. • Lot Width – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 100 feet, the proposed average lot widths range from 56.43 to 99.01 feet. • Lot Depth – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum of 120 feet in depth, the proposed lot depths range from 87.45 to 331 feet. The lot depths for all proposed lots, except Lot 1 comply with the minimum requirements as proposed. • Retaining Wall Structure Setbacks – where the County Ordinance Code considers all retaining walls over three feet as a structure that must meet all setback requirements, the proposed retaining wall setbacks is 0 feet on all lots. Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement 43. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map or submittal of CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first, the Applicant shall execute an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant to Chapter 822-4 Inclusionary Housing, Chapter 822-2 Density Bonus, and Government Code 95915 to ensure that the property will be deed restricted for one unit to be affordable and sold to a moderate income household. The Applicant should allow for a minimum 90-day period for the preparation, County approval, and recordation of the Agreement prior to the milestones referenced above. To initiate the County to prepare and execute an Agreement, the Applicant must file a condition of approval compliance review application accompanied by the appropriate fees, documents, and exhibits listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist and/or Density Bonus Plan Checklist. The Agreement must be submitted to the Board of Supervisors before execution by all parties and recordation. The Agreement will establish the process for determining the unit’s maximum affordable sales price, buyer eligibility, and additional program details as referenced in Chapter 822- 4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and Government Code 65915. A detailed timeline for the project, including the project’s construction, marketing, the Applicant accepting and reviewing applications from qualified households, and the sale of the inclusionary unit. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 21 of 30 General 44. The following are general terms for granting a density bonus and compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. a. The Applicant hereby represents warrants and covenants that will cause the Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County, California, and other places the County may reasonably request. The Applicant shall pay fees incurred with any such recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the document by the County and before the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first. b. The one inclusionary unit in the project shall be available for sale to members of the general public who are income eligible. The Applicant shall not give preference to any particular class or group of persons in selling the units, except that the units must be sold to a household with income no higher than 120% of the Area Median Income for Contra Costa County as adjusted for family size as defined in Section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code. There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), age (except for lawful senior housing), ancestry, or disability, in the sale of the unit in the project nor shall the Applicant or any person claiming under or through the Applicant, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation concerning the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of homeowners of any unit in connection with employment of persons for construction of the project. c. The County will provide the Applicant with income certification forms to be completed by the potential homebuyers. The income levels of all moderate-income household applicants for the inclusionary/density bonus unit shall be pre-certified by the Applicant (or subsequent holder of the Agreement(s)) prior to submittal to the County for review and approval. d. Upon violating any of the Agreement’s provisions by the Applicant, the County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the breach. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a reasonable period, not longer than thirty (30) days after the date the notice is deemed received, or within such further time as the County determines is necessary to correct the violation, the County may declare a default under the Agreement. Upon declaration of a default or if the County determines that the Applicant has made any misrepresentation in connection with receiving any benefits under this Agreement, the County may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for such relief at law or in equity as may be appropriate. Terms of Affordability 45. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted so that if the home is sold within forty-five (45) years, it must be sold at an affordable sales price to a moderate-income household. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 22 of 30 The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted upon sale to ensure the continued affordability of this unit for the required term of affordability in accordance with Government Code 65915. a. Affordable Sales Price – means a sales price at which a moderate-income household can qualify for the purchase of target units, taking into account available financing, number of bedrooms and therefore, assumed household size, reasonable down payment, and affordable housing costs as defined in Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5. The affordable sales price for moderate income households must not exceed a price affordable to a persons and families whose income is at or below one hundred ten percent AMI. Development Standards 46. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and finished in compliance with the approved Inclusionary Housing Plan. The unit is subject to the standards of Section 822.4.412 of the County Ordinance. a. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and occupied before or concurrently with the market rate units within the same residential development. A hold will be placed on the final inspection/occupancy for all building permits issued within the subdivision to ensure that the inclusionary/density bonus unit meets this requirement. b. The average number of bedrooms for the inclusionary unit must be equivalent to the average number of bedrooms for market-rate units within the same residential development. Marketing and Homebuyer Selection 47. It is anticipated that the Applicant will construct all project units and market them before construction completion. The Applicant shall submit documentation and other information to the County for review and approval at least 90 days prior to construction completion and prior to the Applicant’s request for a final building inspection and final occupancy of the building. The documentation and information required for review and approval are listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist or Density Bonus Plan Checklist and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Marketing Plan b. Homebuyer Selection Plan. The homebuyer selection plan should include a provision for a lottery process for the inclusionary/density bonus unit. c. Marketing Materials, including translated Marketing Materials in Spanish and Chinese. In addition to other marketing efforts proposed by the Applicant in the marketing plan, the inclusionary unit shall be marketed through local, non-profit, social service, faith- based, and other organizations with potential buyers as clients or constituents. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 23 of 30 Marketing materials shall be made available online for at least one month before the first sale and shared with County Housing staff to promote to its mailing lists. The Applicant shall translate marketing materials, and the marketing plan shall be submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development before marketing the inclusionary housing unit. Marketing may also include publicity through local television and radio stations as well as local newspapers, including the Contra Costa Times, Classified Flea Market, El Mensajero, La Opinion, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily. 48. The developer shall refer all qualified homebuyers to a HUD Homebuyer Counselor prior to the sale of the inclusionary unit. For-Sale Inclusionary/Density Bonus Unit Restrictions 49. The initial sale of a for-sale inclusionary unit shall occur only to a household that meets the following criteria: a. The household has not owned a residence within the previous three years; and b. The household has no more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars in assets. The amount excludes assets reserved for a down payment and closing costs, assets in retirement savings accounts, and medical savings accounts. c. The purchaser of the for-sale inclusionary/density bonus unit must agree to occupy the dwelling unit as their principal residence. d. The term of affordability for the inclusionary/density bonus unit is 45 years. The for-sale inclusionary unit may be resold after the initial sale to a moderate-income purchaser at a moderate-income sales price. If a moderate-income purchaser cannot be found after diligently marketing the unit widely and after a period determined by DCD, the unit may be sold to an above- moderate- income purchaser at a market price, provided that the sale results in a recapture by the County of financial interest in the unit equal to the sum of: The difference between the initial affordable sales price and the appraised market value of the unit at the time of the initial sale; and The County’s proportionate share of any appreciation since the time of the initial sale. Appreciation is the difference between the resale price to the above-moderate-income purchaser and the appraised market value at the initial sale. The County’s proportionate share of appreciation is equal to the percentage by which the initial affordable sales price was less than the appraised market value at the time of the initial sale. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 24 of 30 Prequalification of Homebuyers and Compliance Review 50. The Applicant is responsible for marketing and prequalifying potential homebuyers for income qualification. The Applicant shall submit for DCD’s review and prequalification prior to the initial sale of the inclusionary/density bonus unit, and the Applicant shall submit to the Department of Conservation and Development for review and approval, all forms, and documentation demonstrating that the buyer of the unit is qualified as a moderate-income household. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection/ occupancy of all building permits associated with the construction of the residences in the project until documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of Conservation and Development. To initiate this prequalification review, the applicant must file a COA Compliance Review Application if there is no open compliance review application for this project. 51. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and Development informed of the contact information of the owner or designee responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be contacted (i.e., mailing addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers) at all times. a. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first, and with filing a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the name of the contact representing the property owner for permit compliance and their contact information. b. Should the contact subsequently change (e.g., new designee or owner), within 30 days of the change, the Applicant shall issue a letter to the Department of Conservation and Development with the name of the new party who has been assigned permit compliance responsibility and their contact information. Failure to satisfy this condition may result in the commencement of procedures to revoke the permit. PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION CDSD20-09531 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9, and Title 10 of the Ordinance Code. Any exception(s) must be stipulated in these Conditions of Approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the tentative map submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development on January 28, 2022. COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO FILING OF THE PARCEL MAP. General Requirements 52. In accordance with Section 92-2.006 of the Ordinance Code, this subdivision shall conform CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 25 of 30 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 vesting tentative map received by the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division, on January 28, 2022. 53. Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted, if necessary, to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, along with review and inspection fees, and security for all improvements required by the Ordinance Code for the conditions of approval of this subdivision. Any necessary traffic signing and stripping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division of the Public Works Department and the City of Pleasant Hill as applicable. Roadway Improvements (Grayson Road) 54. The Applicant shall construct frontage improvements along Grayson Road in accordance with the recommendations of the City of Pleasant Hill. The applicant will need to demonstrate that the City of Pleasant Hill approves of the frontage improvements proposed under this project. The applicant shall construct curb, 5-foot sidewalk, necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage, and necessary transitions along the north side of Grayson Road, beginning at the existing sidewalk terminus opposite the project site and continuing eastward to the west side of Buttner Road at its intersection with Grayson Road, culminating with an ADA-compliant ramp at the intersection. These requirements may be modified as necessary to conform to the City of Pleasant Hill’s standards. Access to Adjoining Property 55. The Applicant shall furnish proof to the Public Works Department 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. 56. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Pleasant Hill for construction within the limits of the City of Pleasant Hill. 57. The Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved site/development plan. Abutters Rights 58. Applicant shall relinquish abutter’s rights of access along Grayson Road with the exception of the proposed private road intersection. Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance: 59. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the private road intersection with Grayson Road for a design speed of 35 miles per hour. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 26 of 30 provide sight distance at these driveways. Any new landscaping, signs, fencing, retaining walls, or other obstructions proposed at the driveways shall be setback to ensure that the sight lines are clear. Private Road 60. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system to current County private road standards with a minimum pavement width of 28 feet, with 4.5-foot sidewalk (measured from the face of curb) within a minimum 33-foot access easement. 61. The Applicant shall construct the on-site roadways and the internal road network (serving the residential development) to current County private road standards. Although the proposed on-site roadways are shown as private, the pavement structural section shall conform to County public road standards. 62. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, applicant shall construct a paved turnaround at the end of the proposed private road subject to the review of the Fire District. Street Lights: 63. Property owner(s) shall annex to the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2010-1 formed for Countywide Street Light Financing. Annexation into a street light service area does not include the transfer of ownership and maintenance of street lighting on private roads. Bicycle - Pedestrian Facilities: 64. The Applicant shall design all public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance with Title 24 (for Accessibility) and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This shall include all sidewalks, paths, driveway depressions, and curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the curb returns to accommodate the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4-foot landing on top of any curb ramp proposed. Parking 65. Parking shall be prohibited on one side of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 36 feet and on both sides of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 28 feet. “No Parking” signs shall be installed along these portions of the roads subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department. Utilities/Undergrounding 66. The Applicant shall underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities, including those along the frontage of Grayson Road. Applicant shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground electrical, gas, telephone, cable television and communication conduits and cables including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 27 of 30 structures as a part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. The composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans shall be signed by a licensed civil engineer. Drainage Improvements: 67. 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 system which conveys the stormwater to a natural watercourse, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. Applicant shall verify the adequacy at any downstream drainage facility accepting stormwater from this project prior to discharging runoff. If the downstream system(s) is inadequate to handle the existing and project condition for the required design storm event, applicant shall construct improvements to make the system adequate. Applicant shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. 68. The nearest public drainage facility is an existing storm drain located on Grayson Road. Applicant shall verify its adequacy prior to discharging run off. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 69. Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards. 70. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner. Floodplain Management: 71. A portion of the project property lies within a Special Flood Hazard Area (100 year flood boundary) as designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The applicant shall be aware of and comply with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (Federal) and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance as they pertain to development and future construction of any structures on this property. Creek Banks and Creek Structure Setbacks: 72. The Property owner shall relinquish "development rights" over that portion of the site that is within the structure setback area of Grayson Creek. The structure setback area shall be determined by using the criteria outlined in Chapter 914 14, "Rights of Way and Setbacks," of the Subdivision Ordinance. "Development rights" shall be conveyed to the County by grant deed. 73. The property owner shall be aware that the creek banks on the site are potentially unstable. The property owner shall execute a recordable agreement with the County which states that the developer and the property owner and the future property owner(s) will hold harmless Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 28 of 30 Conservation District in the event of damage to the on-site and off-site improvements as a result of creek- bank failure or erosion. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): 74. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (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. Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMPs) for the reduction or elimination of stormwater pollutants. The project design shall incorporate, wherever feasible, the following long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program for the site's stormwater drainage. - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Install approved full trash capture devices on all catch basins (excluding catch basins within bioretention basins) as reviewed and approved by Public Works Department. Trash capture devices shall meet the requirements of the County’s NPDES Permit. - Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain markers. - Construct concrete driveway weakened plane joints at angles to assist in directing run-off to landscaped/pervious areas prior to entering the street curb and gutter. - Distribute public information items regarding the Clean Water Program and lot specific IMPs to buyers. - Other alternatives comparable to the above as approved by Public Works. Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance 75. The applicant shall submit a final Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) and a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance Plan (O+M Plan) to the Public Works Department, which shall be reviewed for compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and shall be deemed consistent with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) prior to filing of the Final Map. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant. 76. Improvement plans shall be reviewed to verify consistency with the final SWCP and compliance with Provision C.3 of the County’s NPDES Permit and the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014). 77. Stormwater management facilities shall be subject to inspection by the Public Works Department; all time and materials costs for inspection of stormwater management facilities shall be borne by the applicant. 78. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall enter into a Stormwater Management Facility Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 29 of 30 in which the property owner(s) shall accept responsibility for and related to the operation and maintenance of the stormwater facilities, and grant access to relevant public agencies for inspection of stormwater management facilities. 79. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall annex the subject property into Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities), which funds responsibilities of Contra Costa County under its NPDES Permit to oversee the ongoing operation and maintenance of stormwater facilities by property owners. 80. Any proposed water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer than 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. Drainage Area Fee Ordinance: 81. The Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 62 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors prior to initiation of the use requested with this application. This fee shall be paid prior to filing of the Final Map. ADVISORY NOTES ADVISORY NOTES ARE NOT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; THEY ARE PROVIDED TO ALERT THE APPLICANT TO ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES, STATUTES, AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT. A. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, ASSESSMENTS, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations or exactions required as part of this project approval. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant to Govern ment Code Section 66020 and must be delivered to the Community Development Division within a 90 - day period that begins on the date that this project is approved. If the 90 th day falls on a day that the Community Development Division is closed, then the protest must be submitted by the end of the next business day. B. Applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Central Contra Costa Areas of Benefit, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Payment is required prior to issuance of a building permit. C. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and Wildlife of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Wildlife Code. D. 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. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 30 of 30 E. Further development of the parcel may need to comply with the latest Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. This compliance may require a Stormwater Control Plan and an Operations and Maintenance Plan prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. Compliance may also require annexation of the subject property into the Community Facilities District 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities) and entering into a standard Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County. F. This project is subject to the development fees in effect under County Ordinance as December 17, 2020, the date the vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Department of Conservation and Development. These fees are in addition to any other development fees, which may specified in the conditions of approval. G. Additional requirements may be imposed by the following agencies and departments: • Public Works Department • Building Inspection Division • Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District • Health Services Department • Central Contra Costa Sanitary District • East Bay Municipal Utility District The Applicant is strongly encouraged to review these agencies’ requirements prior to continuing with the project. Page 1 Contra Costa County March 24, 2023 NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Revised) County File No. CDSD20-09531 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 Division of the Department of Conservation and Development of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: PROJECT NAME: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision (County File #CDSD20-09531) LOCATION: The property is located at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 APPLICANT: Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde, 1908 Cambridge Place, Walnut Creek, CA 94598 LEAD AGENCY: Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development (925)655-2872 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 DESCRIPTION: Project Description: The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021-square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code- protected trees. John Kopchik Director Aruna Bhat Deputy Director Deidra Dingman Deputy Director Jason Crapo Deputy Director Maureen Toms Deputy Director Gabriel Lemus Assistant Deptuty Director Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Phone: 1-855-323-2626 Page 2 The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit. In addition to the increased density of one unit (10 units total), the project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow for alternative roadway improvements along Grayson Road, including bicycle lane striping, where curb, 5-foot-wide sidewalk, necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage are required. Site and Area Description: The 3.05-gross-acre project site is located on the south side of Grayson Road, opposite the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The roughly L-shaped project site is comprised of two parcels: a northern parcel that fronts on Grayson Road, and a southern parcel that is bound by Grayson Creek to the south and east. Grayson Creek runs roughly east- west along the southern boundary of the project site, then takes a northward bend forming the east boundary. Other private properties with single-family residences abut the property to the north and west. The immediate surrounding area is representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County. Properties along Grayson Road are predominantly developed with single-family residences. Within a half-mile radius, developed parcels range in size from 4,000 square feet to 68,700 square feet, with a median size of approximately 13,000 square feet. The larger vicinity includes a mix of neighborhood-residential uses including single-family residences, churches, schools, and parks. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: The initial study for the proposed project identified potentially significant impacts in the environmental areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Environmental analysis determined that measures were available to mitigate potential adverse impacts to insignificant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c), 21063.5, and Article 6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15071) the MND describes the proposed project; identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the potential significant environmental impacts, which may result from the proposed project; and identifies measures to mitigate adverse environmental impacts. The mitigations identified in this document and designed for the proposed project, will ensure that the project will not cause a significant impact on the environment. A copy of the mitigated negative declaration and all documents referenced in the mitigated negative declaration may be reviewed on the Department of Conservation and Development webpage at the following address: Page 3 https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/4841/CEQA-Notifications Public Comment Period - The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental documents extends to Monday, April 24, 2023, at 5:00 P.M. Following the close of the public comment period, the County will consider adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to consideration of the Vesting Tentative Map. Any comments should be in writing and submitted by email to joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us or by post to the following address: Name: Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP; Project Planner; (925) 655-2872 Community Development Division Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 _________________________________ Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP Project Planner cc: County Clerk’s Office (2 copies) Adjacent Occupants and Owners Notification List Attached: Vicinity Map Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:4,514 Notes0.10.07 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Vicinity Map City Limits Unincorporated Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Maintained Roads Water Bodies County Boundary Bay Area Counties Assessment Parcels 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision (County File #CDSD20-09531) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP (925) 655-2872 joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us 4. Project Location: 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde 1908 Cambridge Place Walnut Creek, CA 94598 6. General Plan Designation: The project site is located within the Single- Family Residential – Low Density (SL) General Plan Land Use designation. 7. Zoning: The project site is located within the R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District. 8. Description of Project: The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05 acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021-square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. 2 Running southwest to northwest along the southern boundary of the project site is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek. The proposed project does not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees.1 The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit. In addition to the increased density of one unit (10 units total), the project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. 9.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The 3.05-gross-acre project site is located on the south side of Grayson Road, opposite the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The roughly L-shaped project site is comprised of two parcels: a northern parcel that fronts on Grayson Road, and a southern parcel that is bound by Grayson Creek to the south and east. Grayson Creek runs roughly east-west along the southern boundary of the project site, then takes a northward bend forming the east boundary. Other private properties with single-family residences abut the property to the north and west. The immediate surrounding area is representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County. Properties along Grayson Road are predominantly developed with single-family residences. Within a half-mile radius, developed parcels range in size from 4,000 square feet to 68,700 square feet, with a median size of approximately 13,000 square feet. The larger vicinity includes a mix of neighborhood- residential uses including single-family residences, churches, schools, and parks. Regional access to the site is provided via I-680 by way of Gregory Lane and Taylor Boulevard and is also provided via State Route (SR) 24 by way of Pleasant Hill Road/Taylor Boulevard. Local access to the project site would be provided via Grayson Road and a new private internal street. 1 Tree #134 was authorized to be removed under an emergency tree removal by Contra Costa County on 10/28/21 3 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Contra Costa County Public Works Department, City of Pleasant Hill, Contra Costa County Fire District, Contra Costa County Local Area Formation District (LAFCO), East Bay Municipal Utility District, and Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. 11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Notice of the proposed project was sent to Native American tribes, as applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1. A Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission, dated October 28, 2015, was used to identify tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. No requests for consultation were received 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. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Services Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance Environmental 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. 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact 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. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP, Senior Planner Date Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development 03/24/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? SUMMARY: Less Than Significant a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (No Impact) Figure 9-1 of the Open Space Element of the County General Plan identifies major scenic ridges and scenic waterways in the County. According to this map, there are no designated scenic vista points in the area of the project site and therefore the project would not displace or obstruct views from a scenic vista. Furthermore, existing views of, and from the project site, would not be affected by the project because the proposed residential development would be built primarily at lower-lying elevations consistent with the existing surrounding residential neighborhood. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a state scenic highway? (No Impact) The Scenic Routes Map (Figure 5-4) of the County General Plan’s Transportation and Circulation Element identifies scenic routes in the County, including both State Scenic Highways and County designated Scenic Routes. No scenic routes are located in the project vicinity. The nearest officially designated State Scenic Highway is a portion of State Route 24, located approximately 3.41 miles south of the project site. The second closest designated State Scenic Highway is a portion of Interstate 680, which is located approximately 3.9 miles south of the project site. The project site is not visible from either State Route 24, Interstate 680, or any other more distant scenic highway. The site is surrounded by predominantly single-family residential development. The project is not located near any designated scenic highway and would not damage any scenic resources related to a scenic highway. The project would not impact trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings considered to be significant scenic resources. Thus, no impact is expected on these resources. c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality (Less than Significant Impact) The project is located in an urbanized area as designated by the U.S. Census Bureau Urban Area Reference Maps. The visual character of the site would change with the eventual development of the proposed 10 lots. However, the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan designation of Single-Family Residential – Low Density and the surrounding residential neighborhood. Though the project would include waivers from development standards for the R-15 zoning district, the residential project would be consistent with other residential development in the area, and thus the impact to the visual character of the area is expected to be less than significant. Additionally, the applicant would be required to submit a landscape plan prior to the issuance of the first building permit, ensuring adequate planting of trees and other landscaping on the site. Lastly, with approval of the requested concessions, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality and impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) Minimal glare would be introduced in the area. The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light-sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. The new sources of light associated with the proposed new 10 homes would illuminate the surrounding properties and Grayson Creek; thus, the project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light. Consequently, the applicant is required to implement the following mitigation measures to reduce impacts on nighttime views. Aesthetics 1: Thirty days prior to application for a building permit for subdivision improvements, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: 1. All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. 2. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact on nighttime views to a less than significant level. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Open Space Element. • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Transportation and Circulation Element. • U.S. Department Of Commerce, Economics & Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Census Bureau, TIGERweb., Accessed March 2023. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, March 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) 2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique 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? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique 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? (No Impact) As shown on the California Department of Conservation’s Contra Costa County Important Farmland 2016 map, the project site includes land classified as “Urban And Built-Up Land.” “Urban And Built-Up Land” is occupied by structures with a building density of at least one unit to one and one half acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel, and is not considered farmland. Thus, the proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide importance to a non-agricultural use; therefore, no impact is expected. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (No Impact) The project site is within the R-15 Single-Family Residential district and has a Single- Family Low-Density General Plan Land Use designation. No agricultural uses are in the immediate vicinity of the project. Furthermore, the project site is not zoned for agricultural use, the project site is not included in a Williamson Act contract, and there is no reason to believe the project would conflict with any existing agricultural uses. Therefore, no impact is expected from a conflict with existing agricultural uses. c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g) or conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? (No Impact) The project site is not considered forest land as defined by California Public Resources Code Section 12220(g), timberland as defined by California Public Resources Code Section 4526, or zoned Timberland Production as defined by Government Code section 51104(g). Furthermore, the project site is within the R-15 district and the proposed use is an allowed use within the zoning district. Thus, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land or timberland. California Public Resources Code Section 12220, under the Forest Legacy Program Act, defines "forest land" as land that can support 10 percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. Public Resources Code 4526, under the Forest Practice Act, defines "timberland" as land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of any commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. Commercial species are determined by the board on a district basis after consultation with the district committees and others. California Government Code 51104, under the Timberland Productivity Act, defines "timberland" as privately owned land, or land acquired for state forest purposes, which is devoted to and used for growing and harvesting timber, or for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses, and which is capable of growing an average annual volume of wood fiber of at least 15 cubic feet per acre. "Timberland production zone" or "TPZ" means an area which has been zoned pursuant to Section 51112 or 51113 of the Government Code and is devoted to and used for growing and harvesting timber, or for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses, as defined in Public Resources Code 4526 or 12220. With respect to the general plans of cities and counties, "timberland preserve zone" means "timberland production zone." As stated in the Contra Costa County General Plan, no land is used for timber harvesting in the County. d) Would the project involve or result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? (No Impact) The project site is not considered forest land, as discussed in “c” above. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? (No Impact) The proposed project would add 10 single-family residences to a residentially zoned property in a residential area. This improvement would not remove any land from potential agricultural production. Thus, the project would have no impact on the conversion of farmland. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Land Use Element. • California Department of Conservation. Accessed July 19, 2021. Contra Costa County Important Farmland 2016. • Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. Accessed July 19, 2021. 2016 Agricultural Preserves Map. http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/882/Map-of-Properties- Under-Contract?bidId= 3. AIR QUALITY – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? SUMMARY: a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) Contra Costa County is within the San Francisco Bay air basin, which is regulated by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) pursuant to the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. The purpose of the Clean Air Plan is to bring the air basin into compliance with the requirements of Federal and State air quality standards. BAAQMD has prepared CEQA Guidelines to assist lead agencies in air quality analysis, as well as to promote sustainable development in the region. The CEQA Guidelines support lead agencies in analyzing air quality impacts. If, after proper analysis, the project’s air quality impacts are found to be below the significance thresholds, then the air quality impacts may be considered less than significant. The Air District developed screening criteria to provide lead agencies and project applicants with a conservative indication of whether the proposed project could result in potentially significant air quality impacts. If all of the screening criteria are met by a proposed project, then the lead agency or applicant would not need to perform a detailed air quality assessment of their project’s air pollutant emissions. The proposed project could result in the future construction of ten single-family residences and associated development on the project site. This would be well below the BAAQMD screening criteria threshold of 56 dwelling units. Therefore, a detailed air quality analysis is not necessary. In addition to the screening threshold, a project must also include BAAQMD Best Management Practices (BMPs) for constriction to be consistent with the Clean Air Plan. Thus, the following Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 would be included as part of the project to ensure consistency with the plan. Air Quality 1: The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans. 1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. 2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. 3. All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. 4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. 5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. 6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. 7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. 8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) The region is in nonattainment for the federal and state ozone standards, the state PM10 standards, and the federal and state PM2.5 standards. As discussed above, the proposed project would not result in significant emissions of criteria air pollutants during the construction period or during project operation. Although the proposed project would contribute small increments to the level of criteria air pollutants in the atmosphere, the project would have a less than significant adverse environmental impact on the level of any criteria pollutant, because it is below the screening threshold. Nevertheless, the applicant has provided the following emissions estimates for the project. Construction Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, was used to estimate the proposed project’s construction emissions. CalEEMod provides a consistent platform for estimating construction and operational emissions from a wide variety of land use projects and is the model recommended by the BAAQMD for estimating project emissions. Estimated construction emissions have been compared with the applicable thresholds of significance established by the BAAQMD to assess ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5 construction emissions to determine significance for this criterion. As shown in the table below, the proposed project would be constructed in an estimated total of 320 workdays. For a more detailed description of the construction parameters used in estimating air pollutant emissions modeling, please refer to Appendix A of the applicant provided supplemental Initial Study document. Construction Activity Start Date End Date Working Days per Week Total Number of Working Days Demolition 3/1/2023 3/14/2023 5 10 Site Preparation 3/15/2023 3/28/2023 5 10 Grading 3/29/2023 7/18/2023 5 80 Building Construction 7/19/2023 4/23/2024 5 200 Paving 4/24/2024 4/30/2024 5 5 Architectural Coating 5/1/2024 5/21/2024 5 15 Source: CalEEMod Output Files, Appendix A. The following table presents the average daily construction emissions compared with the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds. Construction Activity Air Pollutants1 (tons/year) ROG NO X PM 10 (Exhaust) PM 2.5 (Exhaust) Demolition 0.01 0.11 <0.01 <0.01 Site Preparation 0.01 0.14 <0.01 <0.01 Grading 0.07 0.72 0.03 <0.01 Building Construction 2023 0.10 0.90 0.04 0.04 Building Construction 2024 0.07 0.59 0.03 0.02 Paving <0.01 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 Architectural Coating 0.08 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Total Emissions (tons) 0.34 2.49 0.11 0.08 Daily Average Total Emissions (lbs) 689.56 4,985.60 222.08 161.96 Construction Activity Air Pollutants1 (tons/year) ROG NO X PM 10 (Exhaust) PM 2.5 (Exhaust) Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day)2 2.15 15.58 0.69 0.51 Significance Threshold (lbs/day) 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Notes: lbs = pounds NO X = oxides of nitrogen PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases 1 Totals may not add up due to rounding. Calculations use unrounded totals. 2 Calculated by dividing the total lbs of emissions by the total number of nonoverlapping working days of construction (320 workdays). Source: CalEEMod Output (see Appendix A). As shown in the table, the construction emissions from all construction activities are below the recommended thresholds of significance; therefore, project construction would have less than significant impact related to emissions of ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5. As previously discussed, the proposed project would implement Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 for dust control to reduce potential impacts related to fugitive dust emissions during project construction. Given the project is below the numeric threshold for number of units and screening threshold for individual emissions, project construction would have a less than significant impact with mitigation. Operational Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 Operational emissions would include area, energy, and mobile sources. Area sources include emissions from architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscape equipment, while energy sources include emissions from the combustion of natural gas for water and space heating. Mobile sources include exhaust and road dust emissions from the vehicles that would travel to and from the project site. Pollutants of concern include ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5. The applicant analyzed project operations based on a 2024 starting date, the first calendar year of potential operation. The major sources for proposed operational emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 include motor vehicle traffic, use of natural gas, and the occasional repainting of buildings. The average daily and annual emissions are presented in the following table. Operational emissions of the respective pollutants were calculated using CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0. For detailed assumptions used to estimate emissions, see Appendix A of the applicant provided supplemental Initial Study document. Emissions Source Criteria Pollutants ROG NO X PM 10 (Total) PM 2.5 (Total) Annual Emissions Summary (tons/year) Area 0.22 0.00 0.01 0.01 Energy 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 Mobile (Motor Vehicles) 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.02 Total Project Emissions 0.26 0.06 0.09 0.04 Thresholds of Significance 10 10 15 10 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Average Daily Emissions Summary (lbs/day) Project Emissions (lbs/year) 527 128 189 72 Average Daily Project Emissions (lbs/day)1 1.44 0.35 0.52 0.20 Thresholds of Significance 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Notes: NO X = nitrous oxides. PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases 1 For average daily emissions, the proposed project is assumed to operate 365 days per year. Therefore, the annual tonnage of emissions is multiplied by 2,000 pounds per ton to identify total pounds of emissions and divided by 365 days per year to identify average daily emissions. Source: CalEEMod Output (see Appendix A). As shown in the table, the proposed project would not exceed the BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance during operation, indicating that ongoing project operations would not be considered to have the potential to generate a significant quantity of air pollutants. Therefore, long-term operational impacts associated with criteria pollutant emissions generated by the proposed project would be less than significant. Operational Carbon Monoxide Hotspot The CO emissions from traffic generated by the proposed project could be a concern at the local level. Congested intersections can result in the potential for high, localized concentrations of CO, known as a CO hotspot. The BAAQMD recommends a screening analysis to determine whether a project has the potential to contribute to a CO hotspot. The screening criteria identify when site-specific CO dispersion modeling is necessary. The proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to air quality for local CO if all the following screening criteria are met: 1. The project is consistent with an applicable Congestion Management Program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans; and 2. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and 3. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway). As indicated by the Transportation Planning Division in the letter titled, “County File #SD20-9531 – 30-Day Comments,” the proposed project would not exceed the County adopted Transportation Analysis Guidelines VMT screening threshold. Per the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less would be expected to have less than significant VMT impacts. As a result, since the proposed project would develop 10 residential units, the proposed project would be below the screening threshold. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Contra Costa County guidelines and the applicable congestion management agency. As described previously, the proposed project would not meet the County Transportation Analysis Guidelines threshold and as such, no transportation impact analysis was required for the proposed project, because the project would be expected to result in less than significant impacts related to VMT. Thus, the proposed project’s anticipated trip generation would not be expected to result in a significant increase in traffic volumes on nearby intersections. Therefore, the addition of proposed project traffic volumes would not result in nearby intersections experiencing traffic volumes of 44,000 or more vehicles per hour. CO hotspots can still occur when a transportation facility’s design or orientation prevents the adequate dispersion of CO emissions from vehicles, resulting in the accumulation of local CO concentrations. The design or orientation of a transportation facility that may prevent the dispersion of CO emissions include tunnels, parking garages, bridge underpasses, natural or urban canyons, below-grade roadways, or other features where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. However, adjacent roadways that would receive new vehicle trips generated by the proposed project do not include transportation facilities where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. Grayson Road would receive vehicle trips generated by the proposed project and is an exposed surface roadway with none of the design features discussed above that could prevent atmospheric mixing. Therefore, the proposed project is considered consistent with the local Congestion Management Program. Based on the above criteria, the proposed project would not exceed the CO screening criteria and would have a less than significant impact related to CO. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Less Than Significant With Mitigation) Subdivision of the 3.05-acre Project Site, and future occupancy of the 10 single-family residences would not cause any localized emissions that could expose sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences, schools) to unhealthy long-term air pollutant levels. As detailed in section b) above, the emissions from construction of the project are expected to be below BAAQMD screening criteria pollutants. Construction activities, however, could result in localized emissions of dust and diesel exhaust that could result in temporary impacts to nearby single-family residences. The applicant has provided an air quality analysis for these impacts which provides the following information. Air dispersion modeling was utilized to assess the project’s potential health risks using American Meteorological Society/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Version 22112, which is the air dispersion model accepted by the EPA and the BAAQMD for preparing HRAs. As previously discussed, project construction is anticipated to start in March 2023 and conclude in May 2024. The following AERMOD modeling parameters were utilized to identify the DPM concentration at identified receptors. 1. Sensitive receptors (e.g., schools, daycare facilities, hospitals, care facilities, residences) in the immediate project vicinity are represented in the model with discrete Cartesian receptors at a flagpole height of 1.5 meters. No schools, daycares, or community centers, are located within 1,250 feet of the proposed project site. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site represented in the air dispersion modeling include the following: a. Single-family residences immediately adjacent to the project site boundary to the north, east, south, and west. 2. AERMOD’s default regulatory dispersion option was selected. 3. The Urban dispersion coefficient was used as greater than 50 percent of the land surrounding the project site is currently developed. 4. Emissions were characterized in the model using various area and volume sources to represent different activities. The following describes the emission sources utilized in the model for each model scenario. a. On-site construction activities are represented with one polygon area source across the entire project site. b. Off-site construction hauling and vendor truck operation for project construction is represented with line volume sources on Grayson Road and parts of Reliz Valley Road. Off-site emissions were adjusted to account for off-site emissions that would occur within 1,000 feet of the project site (see Off-Site PM2.5 Exhaust Adjustment Sheet in Appendix A). 5. Meteorological data from the Livermore Municipal Airport Air Monitoring Station was used in AERMOD. This station was selected as it resembles physical site characteristics and elevation generally representative of the project site. Data from the station was pre-processed by the BAAQMD. The model used the most recent six years of data (2012 to 2017). The MIR during project construction were found at a residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the east of the northeast corner of the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). The following table presents a summary of the proposed project’s construction cancer risk, chronic non-cancer hazard, and annual PM2.5 concentration impacts at each MIR. As discussed in b) above, Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 would be required to reduce fugitive dust emissions during construction. Construction and grading activities would produce combustion emissions from various sources, including heavy equipment engines, paving, and motor vehicles used by the construction workers. Dust would be generated during site clearing, grading, and construction activities, with the most dust occurring during grading activities. The amount of dust generated would be highly variable and would be dependent on the size of the area disturbed, amount of activity, soil conditions, and meteorological conditions. Although grading and construction activities would be temporary, such activities could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact during project construction. Consequently, the applicant would be required to implement the recommended BAAQMD mitigation measures to reduce construction dust and exhaust impacts outlined in Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1. Impact Scenario Cancer Risk (risk per million) Chronic Non-Cancer Hazard Index Annual PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Residential MIR1 44.45 0.04123 0.20616 BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance 10 1 0.3 Exceeds Individual Source Threshold? Yes No No Notes: µ/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor 1 The Off-Site Residential MIR represents a residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the east of the northeast corner of the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). Source: Appendix A Applicant Supplemental Initial Study. As shown in the table, the proposed project could result in potentially significant health impacts to the maximally impacted receptor prior to the incorporation of cleaner than average on-site construction equipment. Therefore, Mitigation Measure Air Quality 2 would be required to reduce health risk impacts to sensitive receptors from construction of the proposed project. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact on the sensitive receptors during project construction to a less than significant level. The following table summarizes the health and hazard impacts at the maximum impacted sensitive receptor from construction of the project after the implementation of Mitigation Measure Air Quality 2, which would require the use of off-road construction equipment that meet emissions standards for Tier IV engines for all equipment with engines greater than 50 horsepower, as detailed below. Impact Scenario Cancer Risk (risk per million) Chronic Non-Cancer Hazard Index Annual PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Residential MIR1 6.49 0.00602 0.03011 BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance 10 1 0.3 Exceeds Individual Source Threshold? No No No Notes: µ/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor 1 The Off-Site Residential MIR represents a residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the east of the northeast corner of the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). Source: Appendix A. Air Quality 2: During construction activities, all off-road equipment with engines greater than 50 horsepower shall meet either United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or California Air Resource Board (ARB) Tier IV off-road emission standards. The construction contractor shall maintain records documenting compliance with this requirement, including equipment lists. Off-road equipment descriptions and information may include but are not limited to equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. Though the project is under the screening threshold for an air quality analysis, the applicant performed a cumulative Health Risk Assessment that examined the cumulative impacts of the proposed project’s construction emissions and sources of TAC emissions within 1,000 feet of the project site. As noted in the table below, the cumulative impacts from the project construction and existing sources of TACs would be less than the BAAQMD’s cumulative thresholds of significance. Thus, the cumulative health risk impacts from project construction would be less than significant. Source/Impact Scenario Source Type Distance from MIR1 (feet) Cancer Risk (per million) Chronic HI PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Project MIR Project Construction (Unmitigated) Diesel Construction Equipment 30 44.45 0.04123 0.20616 Project Construction (Mitigated) Diesel Construction Equipment 30 6.49 0.00602 0.03011 Existing Stationary Sources Not Applicable — – – – – Roadways Air Basin Existing Major Roadway Network – 1.16075 ND 0.02043 Grayson Road 40 9.11 ND 0.170 Rail Air Basin Railways – 0.22829 ND 0.00036 Freeways Air Basin Highways – 2.59105 ND 0.05598 Cumulative Health Risks Cumulative Maximum with Project DPM Emissions (Unmitigated) 57.54 0.04 0.45 Cumulative Maximum with Project DPM Emissions (Mitigated) 19.58 0.01 0.28 BAAQMD’s Cumulative Thresholds of Significance 100 10 0.8 Threshold Exceeded in Any Scenario? No No No Notes: BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District HI = Hazard Index MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor ND = no data available µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter 1 The MIR above represents the greatest impacted MIR, which is the residence immediately adjacent to the east of the northeast corner for the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). Source: Appendix A. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigations) The proposed project would not produce any major sources of odor and is not located in an area with existing issues (e.g. landfills, treatment plants). Therefore, the operation of the project would have a less than significant impact in terms of odors. During construction and grading, diesel powered vehicles and equipment used on the site could create localized odors. These odors would be temporary; however, there could be a potentially significant adverse environmental impact during project construction due to the creation of objectionable odors. Consequently, the applicant is required to implement Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 above. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the impact from the creation of objectionable odors to a less than significant level Sources of Information • Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017. Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. • Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017. Air Quality Guidelines. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? SUMMARY: Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) A Biological Resources Analysis Report (BRA) was prepared for the project by Olberding Environmental, Inc. (OBI) in May 2021, and subsequently updated in February 2022. A BRA Addendum was prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting (JMC) LLC in November 2022, adding to and partially revising the BRA prepared by OBI in February 2022. As described in the BRA prepared by JMC, The project site supports four habitat types: mixed woodland (0.21 acre), riparian woodland (1.01 acres), Valley Oak woodland (1.18 acres), and developed land (0.21 acre). Grayson Creek flows along the southern boundary of the project site from west to east through a riparian corridor. The project site currently contains 130 trees over 6 inches in diameter. A number of these trees are classified by the County as Protected Trees under the Contra Costa Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. The Olberding BRA utilized the California Natural Diversity Database (CNBBD), maintained by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California, to identify the likelihood that a plant or animal species would be present on the project site. According to the Orlberding report, four special-status plant species have a potential to occur on the project site: Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), Diablo helianthella (Helianthella castanea), Mount Diablo fairy-lantern (Calochortus pulchellus), and bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris). The April 2021 survey of the project site coincided with the blooming period for three of these species (Diablo helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy lantern, bent-flowered fiddleneck) and these species were not observed. However, as described in the JMC Addendum, consistent with CDFW comments on the previously circulated IS/MND, in the absence of protocol-level rare plant surveys for the remaining three species, the presence of Diablo helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy- lantern, and bent-flowered fiddleneck cannot be ruled out. Since the proposed project would require grading within suitable habitat for special-status plants, grading activities within suitable habitat could result in direct impacts to special-status plants through habitat loss or degradation. Thus, implementation of the following Mitigation Measure Biology 1 would require rare plant surveys in advance of construction commencement. Pursuant to the surveys, if State or federally listed plants are discovered on-site, the CDFW and/or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) compensatory mitigations and avoidance and minimization measures will be requirements to minimize special-status plant habitat loss. If rare plant species are found, the mitigation measure requires seed and root stock salvaging to be conducted to preserve the special-status plants. With implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 1, impacts to special-status plant species will be minimized to less than significant. Biology 1: In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol- level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol- level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. The JMC Addendum and Olberding BRA identified that the potential for wildlife to occur on the project site was based on the presence of suitable habitats and occurrences recorded by the CNDDB within the Walnut Creek quadrangle and eight surrounding quadrangles. A total of five bird species were identified to have a moderate to high potential to occur on the project site in a nesting or foraging capacity. The red- shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) all have a high potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. The sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) and American kestrel (Falco sparverius) have a moderate potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk, sharp- skinned hawk, and destrel) were present, and observed foraging on the project site. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed on the project site exhibiting nesting behaviors. Based on this information and comments from CDFW on the previously circulated initial study, the following Mitigation Measures Biology 2 and Biology 3 would be incorporated as part of the project. Biology 2: All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Biology 3: If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF) in the 5-mile radius of the project site. Additionally, during the April 2021 survey, the Project Biologist identified suitable habitat for the CRLF. Furthermore, USFWS designated CRLF critical habitat is located approximately 1.6 miles west of the project site. For these reasons, the Project Biologist stated that CRLF has a moderate potential to occur on the project site, and potential impacts to the species could occur. Amphibian and reptile special-status species such as the western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and California red-legged frog (CRLF) (Rana draytonii) have the potential to disperse through the riparian corridor and upland areas. Thus, project grading could result in the disturbance or loss of special- status individuals. However, with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measures Biology 4 and Biology 5, pre-construction surveys, exclusion fencing, Environmental Awareness training, and USFWS-approved capture and relocation if species are found would be implemented to minimize the impacts of project-related activities on special-status amphibians and reptiles within the riparian corridor to less than significant levels. Biology 4: A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. Biology 5: Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red-legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. Additionally, Grading and excavation activities could expose soil to increased rates of erosion during construction periods. During construction, runoff from the project site could adversely affect aquatic life within the adjacent water features. Surface water runoff could remove particles of fill or excavated soil from the site, or could erode soil down-gradient, if the flow were not controlled. Deposition of eroded material in adjacent water features could increase turbidity, thereby endangering aquatic life, and reducing wildlife habitat. Implementation of appropriate mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to aquatic organisms would be avoided or minimized. Biology 6: A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. In addition, the CDFW will determine adequate protection measures through the Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA). Implementation of all measures and conditions defined by CDFW to protect Grayson Creek and its associated riparian habitat, in addition to implementation of the discussed mitigation measures above would reduce impacts to special-status species within Grayson Creek and its associated habitats to a level considered less than significant under CEQA. Several special-status species have the potential to occur within the upland areas of the project site (i.e., non-riparian vegetation and habitats). These upland areas may be used by foraging and nesting raptors species specified above. The project plans to remove 32 native and eight non-native trees within the upland community. Removal of these trees would impact raptor foraging and nesting bird habitat. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 7 described below, removed trees within the valley oak woodland will be replaced, native vegetation within landscaping will be prioritized, and nesting bird surveys and non-disturbance buffers will be implemented if nesting birds are discovered. These measures would remediate for habitat loss and would minimize impacts to raptor foraging and nesting bird habitat in the uplands to less than significant. Biology 7: Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. Mammals, such as the western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) could use large trees and existing residential buildings for roosting opportunities and foraging habitat within the site. Implementation of the project would result in the demolition of the existing residences along with 40 trees. Tree removal partnered with any project-related construction lighting would result in the disturbance of roosting bats and the loss of roosting and foraging bat habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 8 would include surveys to identify roosting bats with a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan implemented if roosting bats are discovered. Implementation of this measure would reduce impacts to roosting bats to less than significant. Biology 8: For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special-status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: • To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. • Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. • If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artif,icial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. The Alameda whipsnake could also disperse through the site’s upland habitat, and project grading could result in the disturbance or loss of this species. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 4, pre-construction surveys and Environmental Awareness training would help to identify and avoid dispersing individuals, minimizing the impacts of project-related activities on the Alameda whipsnake to less than significant. As described in the JMC BRA Addendum, with the implementation of all mitigation measures and conditions defined through the SAA, or other permits related to the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) compliance, if determined necessary by the trustee agencies, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. Impacts would be considered less than significant with mitigation. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? As detailed in the JMC BRA Addendum, the project site contains two sensitive natural communities: Riparian Woodland and Valley Oak Woodland. Project implementation would require grading work within 0.21 acre of the riparian habitat located on the project site, resulting in habitat loss and disturbance. The mixture of oaks, bays, and buckeyes along with the dense cover of shrubby understory vegetation provide wildlife with many different food sources, nesting opportunities and cover from predators. Project implementation would result in removal of approximately 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland, which is considered a sensitive natural community and is an oak woodland protected under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 6, and Biology 7 would include replacement of riparian trees removed from the project site, installation of erosion control measures, and implementation of post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation. Impacts to riparian habitat would be reduced to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through avoidance and minimization of impacts to riparian habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. In addition to the mitigations above, the CDFW would require a SAA. Implementation of all measures and conditions defined by CDFW to protect riparian habitats would reduce impacts to sensitive natural communities such as Grayson Creek and its associated habitat to a level considered less than significant under CEQA. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) Grayson Creek is a perennial creek that flows along the southern boundary of the project site from west to east through an oak woodland riparian corridor and is a jurisdictional water regulated under the authority of the Army Corps of Engineers, RWQCB, and CDFW. As previously discussed, project implementation would result in impacts regulated under CDFW’s Fish and Game Code Sections 1600-1607, requiring an SAA. Implementation of all measures and conditions defined by the CDFW to protect Grayson Creek and its associated riparian habitat, in addition to implementation of Mitigation measures Biology 2 and Biology 6 would reduce impacts to Grayson Creek and its associated habitats and fish and wildlife resources to a level considered less than significant under CEQA. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) As detailed in the Olberding Biological Resources Analysis Report, and updated in the JMC Addendum, a riparian woodland corridor and upland non-riparian habitat are on the project site. The Grayson Creek corridor and its associated riparian habitat are presumed to act as a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursery sites. The Olberding BRA identifies the Grayson Creek corridor as providing potential suitable foraging and/or dispersal habitat for CRLF, Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and western pond turtle. Additionally, the Olberding BRA identifies suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor. It is presumed that the Grayson Creek riparian habitat would provide wildlife nursery sites due to the combination of presence of suitable nesting/roosting and aquatic habitats. The project design incorporates a stream setback along the north side of the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities, project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian wildlife corridor and nursery site. Grading activities within this wildlife corridor could result in direct impacts to terrestrial individuals using the corridor for dispersal. Tree removal would also result in the loss of nesting bird and roosting bat habitat. The project design incorporates a stream setback along the north side of the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities, project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian wildlife corridor and nursery site. Grading activities within this wildlife corridor could result in direct impacts to terrestrial individuals using the corridor for dispersal. Tree removal would also result in the loss of nesting bird and roosting bat habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measures Biology 2 through Biology 6, which require tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, and installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to wildlife corridors and nursery sites to less than significant through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2 through Biology 6, which requires tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to wildlife corridors and nursery sites to less than significant through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. Additionally, adequate protection of all fish and wildlife resources, including wildlife movement corridors and nursery sites will be defined by the CDFW through the SAA. The SAA program is designed to avoid, minimize, and mitigate any impacts on stream- related resources to a less than significant level under CEQA, and no additional mitigation measures would be necessary. With compliance with all measures defined by the CDFW through the SAA, potential project-related impacts on Grayson Creek and associated fish and wildlife resources, including wildlife movement corridors, nursery sites and other biological resources associated with the riparian habitat are considered less than significant under CEQA Guidelines. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) Vegetation and wildlife policies, including the removal of mature trees, and water resource policies are regulated by Contra Costa County through the Contra Costa General Plan and the Contra Costa Ordinance Code, including the Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance and Creek Setback Ordinance. The following describes the project’s compliance with General Plan policies that are applicable to the proposed project. Policy 8-6: Significant trees, natural vegetation, and wildlife populations generally shall be preserved. Multiple trees on the property will be preserved and others will be replaced. Specifically, a majority of the riparian habitat would be avoided. As described in the JMC Addendum, understory plants on-site would not be considered natural vegetation meriting protection. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 3 would reduce impacts to special-status plants through avoidance and Biology 2 through Biology 6 would reduce impacts to wildlife populations through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to trees. Policy 8-7: Important wildlife habitats which would be disturbed by major development shall be preserved, and corridors for wildlife migration between undeveloped lands shall be retained. Project-related impacts to nesting birds, roosting bats, and dispersing reptiles and amphibians would be reduced to less than significant as discussed above. Policy 8-8: Significant ecological resource areas in the County shall be identified and designated for compatible low-intensity land uses. Setback zones shall be established around the resource areas to assist in their protection. Areas determined to contain significant ecological resources, particularly those containing endangered species, are maintained throughout the County. Implementation of the project would include the preservation of trees and dedication of the creek area to the County ensuring continued preservation of the most valuable habitat portions of the property. Policy 8-9: Areas determined to contain significant ecological resources, particularly those containing endangered species, shall be maintained in their natural state and carefully regulated to the maximum legal extent. Acquisition of the most ecologically sensitive properties within the County by appropriate public agencies shall be encouraged. As discussed above, the most valuable creek portion of the property would be dedicated to the County. Additionally, mitigation measures would avoid sensitive species and restore habitat impacted by the property, providing consistency with the policy by protecting the species and habitat. Policy 8-10: Any development located or proposed within significant ecological resource areas shall ensure that the resource is protected. The project site does not occur within or near any County-designated ecologically significant resource areas. Furthermore, habitat areas on the property would be preserved or avoided to the extent possible. Policy 8-12: Natural woodlands shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible in the course of land development. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2 and Biology 7, which would include replacement of trees removed from the project site would reduce impacts to valley oak woodland to less than significant. Policy 8-15: Existing vegetation, both native and non-native, and wildlife habitat areas shall be retained in the major open space areas sufficient for the maintenance of a healthy balance of wildlife populations. Consistent with this policy, approximately 79 percent of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor would be avoided by project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring on-site). Policy 8-21: The planting of native trees and shrubs shall be encouraged in order to preserve the visual integrity of the landscape, provide habitat conditions suitable for native wildlife, and ensure that a maximum number and variety of well-adapted plants are sustained in urban areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2 and Biology 7 would include replacement of trees removed from the project site with native trees of the same species, if appropriate, landscape plans would prioritize native vegetation. Policy 8-23: Runoff of pollutants and siltation into marsh and wetland areas from outfalls serving nearby urban development shall be discouraged. Where permitted, development plans shall be designed in such a manner that no such pollutants and siltation will significantly adversely affect the value or function of wetlands. In addition, berms, gutters, or other structures should be required at the outer boundary of the buffer zones to divert runoff to sewer systems for transport out of the area. The proposed project has been designed to treat and store stormwater on-site within a detention basin, with excess waters passing into the storm drainage system within Grayson Road. The project design likewise incorporates a 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. Finally, Implementation of the Mitigation Measure Biology 6 which would include installation of erosion control measures would further avoid project impacts to Grayson Creek. Policy 8-78: Where feasible, existing natural waterways shall be protected and preserved in their natural state, and channels which already are modified shall be restored. A natural waterway is defined as a waterway which can support its own environment of vegetation, fowl, fish and reptiles, and which appears natural. The dedication of the creek area of the property to the County would ensure the preservation of the waterway in perpetuity. Policy 8-86: Existing native riparian habitat shall be preserved and enhanced by new development unless public safety concerns require removal of habitat for flood control or other public purposes. The riparian corridor will be largely preserved with the dedication of the creek area to the County. Furthermore, implementation of the above biological mitigation measures and SAA conditions will ensure the riparian area that is impacted will be restored to preserve the habitat value of the riparian area. Policy 8-87: On-site water control shall be required of major new developments so that no increase in peak flows occurs relative to the site's pre-development condition, unless the Planning Agency determines that off-site measures can be employed which are equally effective in preventing adverse downstream impacts. The proposed project has been designed to treat and store stormwater on-site within a retention basin, with excess waters passing into the storm drainage system within Grayson Road. The proposed project plans on the removal of approximately 97 code-protected trees including native species such as coast live oak, valley oak, black walnut, and buckeye. Native trees and all trees greater than 6.5 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) are considered to be protected under the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 816-6, Ordinances 94-59, 94-22, Contra Costa County Code). With implementation of mitigation measures, the Project is not expected to conflict with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, including the Contra Costa County tree protection and setback ordinances: Biology 9: During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially: Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. f. All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wpcontent- /uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf When implemented, the prescribed mitigations would reduce potentially significant adverse impacts to protected trees to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (No Impact) There is one adopted habitat conservation plan in Contra Costa County: the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan / Natural Community Conservation Plan (HCP/NCCP). The plan was approved in May 2007 by the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy, comprised of the cities of Brentwood, Clayton, Oakley, and Pittsburg, and Contra Costa County. The HCP/NCCP establishes a coordinated process for permitting and mitigating the incidental take of endangered species in East Contra Costa County. The plan lists Covered activities that fall into three distinct categories: (1) all activities and projects associated with urban growth within the urban development area (UDA); (2) activities and projects that occur inside the HCP/NCCP preserves; and (3) specific projects and activities outside the UDA. As the project does not fall into any of these categories, the project is not covered by, or in conflict with the adopted HCP. Sources of Information • California Department of Fish and Wildlife. https://map.dfg.ca.gov/lands/. • Department of Conservation and Development, Site Visit Conducted by County Staff. • Olberding Environmental, Inc., May 2021. Biological Resources Analysis • DeBolt Civil Engineering, March 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • Traverso Tree Service, May 6, 2020. Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road. • Johnson Marigot Consulting (JMC) LLC. November 2022. Biological Resources Addendum. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? SUMMARY: Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5? (Less Than Significant Impact) Historical resources are defined in the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5 as resources that fit any of the following definitions: • Is listed in the California Register of Historic Places and has been determined to be eligible for listing by the State Historic Resources Commission; • Is included in a local register of historic resources, and identified as significant in a historical resource survey that has been or will be included in the State Historic Resources Inventory; or • Has been determined to be historically or culturally significant by a lead agency. The archaeological sensitivity map of the County’s General Plan (Figure 9-2), identifies the project area as “Largely Urbanized Area,” which may contain significant archeological resources. While unlikely since the site is fully disturbed, subsurface construction activities always have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. Historic resources can include wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. An Archaeological Survey Report and Historic Resources Evaluation Report, dated February 8, 2007, was prepared for the Project by Suzanne Baker of Archaeological/Historical Consultants. The following are excerpts from the Archaeological Survey and Historic Resources Evaluation Report. On February 5, 2007, Suzanne Baker of Archaeological/Historical Consultants conducted an on-foot archaeological reconnaissance of the project site. The ground was covered in systematic transects two to four meters apart. The ground surface was inspected for evidence of cultural occupation, including midden soil, shell, bone, modified lithic materials, fire- cracked rock, and historic debris and features. Soil was friable, medium brown clay silt containing only a little rock, principally angular pebbles. The two houses occupy much of the project site’s high ground. These and accompanying landscaping, driveways and outbuildings, such as sheds; were the principal impediments to surface observation. Vegetation also obscured the banks of the creek. This included trees, shrubs, and especially, dense groundcover like ivy, vincula, and berry vines. In the rest of the project site, ground visibility was somewhat obscured by a light spring grass cover. Grass was, however, kicked aside at intervals and there were numerous ground squirrel burrows that provided open surfaces for soil observation. Ground visibility in general ranged from fair to good in the open areas of much of the project site. Aside from introduced plants adjacent to the houses and some oleander shrubs and a line of small oak trees parallel and adjacent to Grayson Road, most vegetation occurred along the creek. This was a mix of native riparian species, including live oak, buckeye, blackberry, and introduced species, such as eucalyptus and pine trees, ivy and vincula. A few live oaks stand in the field at the west end of the project area. There are also several redwood trees near the creek, but it is unclear if these are native or were planted by the residents. There are redwoods in some of the drainages in the interior valleys of Contra Costa County. Findings No prehistoric or historic (over 50 years of age) archaeological sites or materials were found during the course of reconnaissance. Two residential structures over 50 years of age exist on the project site. The residence at 1024 Grayson Road was built about 1948 and that at 1026 Grayson Road in 1955. These were recorded on DPR 523 forms, photographed, and evaluated ( refer to Appendix 1 in the report). Significance Criteria The significance criteria for the California Register of Historic Places and the National Register of Historic Places are essentially the same. Section 101 of the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to “expand and maintain a national register of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture...” Part 60.4 of Chapter 1 of Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations outlines the criteria for evaluation of properties for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of State and local importance that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, including: a) That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or b) That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or c) That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that possess high artistic value, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or d) That have yielded, or maybe likely to yield information important in prehistory or history (36 CFR 60. 4). Integrity involves the authenticity of a given property and its ability to convey its significance. The seven aspects of integrity location, setting, design, workmanship, materials, feeling and association are used to measure and property' s integrity. Neither structures at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road is considered eligible for the California or National Registers of Historic Places. Although both have relatively good historic integrity, they are not associated with events or persons significant in local history ( Criteria A and B) and are not architecturally significant (Criterion C). An updated record search and literature review for the project site and its 0.5-mile radius were conducted on September 21, 2022, at the NWIC, located at Sonoma a State University in Rohnert Park, California. The purpose of this review was to access existing cultural resource survey reports, archaeological site records, historic aerial photographs, and historic maps to evaluate whether any previously documented prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, architectural resources, cultural landscapes, or other resources exist within or near the project site. The results of the NWIC indicated that there is one recorded historic-era resource within the project site (the two existing residences) and two prehistoric resources within a 0.5- mile radius of the project site. In addition, there is one area-specific survey report within the project site and 10 reports within a 0.5-mile search radius. However, as discussed above, No prehistoric or historic (over 50 years of age) archaeological sites or materials were found during the course of reconnaissance. On September 22, 2022, the applicant’s consultant First Carbon Solutions (FCS) contacted the NAHC to determine whether any sacred sites were located within the project site or its vicinity. A response was received on October 17, 2022, indicating that the Sacred Lands File search failed to locate the presence of Native American cultural resources within the project site. The NAHC included a list of 15 tribal representatives available for consultation. To ensure that all Native American knowledge and concerns over potential Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) that may be affected by the proposed project are addressed, a letter containing proposed project information was sent to each tribal representative on December 5, 2022. No responses have been received to date. NAHC correspondence and copies of the NAHC letters can be found in Appendix C of the FCS draft report. On June 10, 2021, the County, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21080.3.1 and AB 52, sent notification letters to the Wilton Rancheria Tribe. The County did not receive a response. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) As stated previously, the project site does not appear to host any historic archaeological resources. However, subsurface construction activities always have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. In keeping with the CEQA guidelines, if archaeological remains are uncovered, work at the place of discovery should be halted immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the finds. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the potentially significant impact to a less than significant level. With the implementation of Cultural Resources 1 impacts will be less than significant. Cultural Resources 1: All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Less Than Significant with Mitigation) The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground-disturbing activities. With adherence to existing regulations and with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 2 impacts will be less than significant. Cultural Resources 2: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: 1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 2 impacts will be less than significant. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Open Space Element. • Archaeological/Historical Consultants, February 2007. Archaeological Survey and Historic Resources Evaluation Report. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 6. ENERGY – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? SUMMARY: a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? (Less Than Significant Impact) Environmental effects related to energy include the project’s energy requirements and its energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type during construction and operation; the effects of the project on local and regional energy supplies; the effects of the project on peak and base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy; the degree to which the project complies with existing energy standards; the effects of the project on energy resources; and the project’s projected transportation energy use requirements and its overall use of efficient transportation alternatives, if applicable. The following factors demonstrate a project’s significance in relation to these effects: (1) Why certain measures were incorporated in the project and why other measures were dismissed; (2) The potential of siting, orientation, and design to minimize energy consumption, including transportation energy, increase water conservation and reduce solid-waste; (3) The potential for reducing peak energy demand; (4) Alternate fuels (particularly renewable ones) or energy systems; and (5) Energy conservation which could result from recycling efforts. New energy consumption includes energy required for operation of the expected new residence and transportation system (private and commercial vehicles), as well as energy used for construction and maintenance of the proposed project. Issues related to energy use include the levels of consumption of non-renewable and renewable energy sources for the construction and operation of the proposed project. The proposed project’s energy demand would be typical for a development of this scope and nature, and would comply with current state and local codes concerning energy consumption, including Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, enforced by the Building Inspection division. That the Legislature added the energy analysis requirement in CEQA at the same time that it created an Energy Commission authorized to impose building energy standards indicates that compliance with the building code is a necessary but not exclusive means of satisfying CEQA’s independent requirement to analyze energy impacts broadly. Thus, this report also considers energy consumption related to transportation and efficiency measures not included in the building design. The project is located in a urban residential neighborhood, within walking distance of a commercial district, and within biking distance of the Pleasant Hill Bart Station. The close proximity to these amenities could reduce the automobile trip generation from the project; thus, reducing energy consumption. Other measures that are included in the project that demonstrate the projects efficiency include a photovoltaic (PV) system as required by Title 24 (Energy Code). In addition vegetated landscaping, which would reduce the contamination and quantity of stormwater discharge from the site. Furthermore, compliance with the State Model Water Efficient Landscape requirements indicates that water related energy use would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. The anticipated construction schedule for the proposed project is estimated to last approximately 14 months. Dependent on which years the project is constructed, construction energy demand would likely decrease because of improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements as older, less efficient equipment is replaced by newer and cleaner equipment. The proposed project would require demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coating, and paving activities. Project construction would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of building materials, preparation of the site (e.g., site clearing, and grading), and the actual construction of the building. Petroleum-based fuels such as diesel fuel and gasoline would be the primary sources of energy for these tasks. The types of on-site equipment used during construction of the proposed project could include gasoline- and diesel-powered construction and transportation equipment, including trucks, bulldozers, frontend loaders, forklifts, and cranes. Construction equipment is estimated to consume a total of 38,214 gallons of diesel fuel over the entire construction duration. Fuel use associated with construction vehicle trips generated by the proposed project was also estimated; trips include construction worker trips, haul truck trips for material transport, and vendor trips for construction material deliveries. Fuel use from these vehicles traveling to the project site was based on (1) the projected number of trips the proposed project would generate during construction, (2) average trip distances by trip type, and (3) fuel efficiencies estimated in the ARB Emissions Factors model (EMFAC) mobile source emission model. In total, the proposed project is estimated to generate 156,684 VMT and a combined 7,516 gallons of gasoline and diesel for vehicle travel during construction. Other equipment could include construction lighting, field services (office trailers), and electrically driven equipment such as pumps and other tools. Singlewide mobile office trailers, which are commonly used in construction staging areas, generally range in size from 160 square feet to 720 square feet. A typical 720-square-foot office trailer would consume approximately 10,616 kilowatt-hours (kWh) during the 14-month construction. The proposed project’s construction is not anticipated to result in unusually high energy use. Limitations on idling of vehicles and equipment and requirements that equipment be properly maintained would result in fuel savings. Similarly, compliance with State regulations would limit idling from both on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment and are enforced by the ARB. Additionally, the overall construction schedule and process is already designed to be efficient to avoid excess monetary costs. For example, equipment and fuel are not typically used wastefully due to the added expense associated with renting the equipment, maintaining it, and fueling it. Therefore, the opportunities for future efficiency gains during construction are limited. The proposed 10 single-family homes would consume energy as part of building operations, such as building heating and cooling, and transportation activities from residents’ personal vehicles. Although the BAAQMD 2022 GHG thresholds prohibit natural gas in new development, the proposed project applicant received a notice of completeness for their application on December 17, 2020, which demonstrates the proposed project was designed prior to the new thresholds. As such, natural gas appliances would be included in the proposed project design. Energy consumption of the proposed project is summarized in following table. Annual Project Energy Consumption Energy Consumption Activity Annual Consumption Electricity Consumption 78,105 kWh/year Natural Gas Consumption 385,911 kBTU/year Total Fuel Consumption 7,341 gallons/year Notes: kBTU = kilo-British Thermal Unit kWh = kilowatt-hour Source: Appendix A of FCS Draft IS/MND Report Operation of the proposed project is estimated to consume 78,105 kWh of electricity and 385,911 kBTU of natural gas on an annual basis. The proposed project would be considered to result in a potentially significant impact if it would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. The proposed project would not exceed the County adopted Transportation Analysis Guidelines VMT screening threshold. Per the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less would be expected to have less than significant VMT impacts. As a result, since the proposed project would develop 10 residential units, the proposed project would be below the screening threshold. Therefore, the proposed project’s operational fuel consumption would not be significant because the proposed project would be consistent with County screening thresholds. Furthermore, the proposed project would include rooftop photovoltaic (PV) solar systems on each of the 10 homes, which would further reduce electricity demand. Considering the above analysis, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficiency, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. This impact would be less than significant. Given the above considerations, the project would have a less than significant impact due to energy consumption. b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? (Less Than Significant Impact) The Contra Costa County Climate Action Plan includes a number of Green House Gas (GHG) emission reduction strategies. The strategies include measures such as implementing standards for green buildings and energy-efficient buildings, reducing parking requirements, and reducing waste disposal. Green building codes and debris recovery programs are among the strategies currently implemented by the County. The project would not conflict with the policies outlined in the CAP. Furthermore, as the polices in the CAP are recommendations and not requirements, the project would not conflict with the CAP. Thus, the project would not be considered to have a significant impact. Furthermore, as previously stated, the proposed project’s energy demand would be typical for a development of this scope and nature, and would comply with current state and local codes concerning energy consumption, including Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, enforced by the Building Inspection division. The proposed project would be served with electricity provided by PG&E or MCE. As MCE is an optional provider PG&E has been described below. In 2021, PG&E obtained 48 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources, while the remaining electricity was sourced from nuclear (39 percent), large hydroelectric (4 percent), and natural gas (9 percent). PG&E also offers a Solar Choice 50 percent option that sources 71 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources, and a Solar Choice 100 percent option that sources 94 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project’s electricity provider meets the State’s current objective of 33 percent. The proposed project’s electricity provider would also be required to meet the State’s future objective of 60 percent of in-State electricity sales being generated from renewable energy sources by 2030. As stated above, the buildings would be designed in accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 24, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential Buildings as applicable. These standards include minimum energy efficiency requirements related to building envelope, mechanical systems (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] and water heating systems), and indoor and outdoor lighting. For example, the proposed project would install solar PV systems capable of generating on-site renewable electricity per year and low-flow plumbing fixtures and irrigation heads that are compliant with Title 24 Standards. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County, 2015. Municipal Climate Action Plan. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? SUMMARY a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Less Than Significant Impact) The California Geological Survey (CGS) has delineated Alquist-Priolo (A-P) zones along the known active faults in California. The nearest fault considered active by CGS is the Concord fault, which is mapped approximately 4.5 miles east of the project site. However, because the site is not within the Concord A- P zone, the risk of fault rupture is generally regarded as low. As a result, the potential impact from surface fault rupture would be less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) Figure 10-4 (Estimated Seismic Ground Response) of the County General Plan Safety Element identifies the site in an area rated “Lowest” damage susceptibility. The risk of structural damage from ground shaking is regulated by the building code and the County Grading Ordinance. The building code requires use of seismic parameters which allow structural engineers to design structures based on soil profile types and proximity of faults deemed capable of generating strong violent earthquake shaking. Quality construction, conservative design and compliance with building and grading regulations can be expected to keep risks within generally accepted limits. In addition, Mitigation Measure Geology 1 would require that all recommendations in the Geotechnical Exploration regarding site grading, demolition, foundation design, and construction are incorporated into project plans. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Geology 1 would ensure project design and construction plans take into consideration the unique site-specific seismic conditions to ensure the proposed structures can withstand seismic activities. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure Geology 1 and compliance with CBC requirements, the project impacts would be considered less than significant. Geology 1: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) Soil liquefaction results from loss of strength during cyclic loading, such as imposed by earthquakes. The soil considered most susceptible to liquefaction is clean, loose, saturated, uniformly graded fine sands below the groundwater table; however, low-plasticity silt and clay can also experience liquefaction (or cyclic-softening) under certain conditions. When seismic ground shaking occurs, the soil is subjected to cyclic shear stresses that can cause excess hydrostatic pressures to develop and liquefaction of susceptible soil to occur. According to the US Geological Survey (USGS) seismic hazard map (Figure 6), the site is mostly included in the “very low” liquefaction risk area. However, the south and southeast boundary of the site is mapped as “moderate” liquefaction risk area. In our explorations, we encountered relatively low-blow-count loose material at a depth between approximately 15 to 20 feet below the ground surface at the location of Boring 1-B1 (ENGEO 2019, pg. 25). Therefore, ENGEO performed liquefaction and cyclic softening analysis to evaluate the potential for these seismic hazards and potential effects at the project site. Boulanger and Idriss (2008) found that for practical purposes, soil can be divided into either “sand-like” or “clay-like” behavior. Where sand-like soil can experience “liquefaction” and clay-like soil can experience “cyclic failure or softening”. In general, sand-like soil tends to be gravel, sand, and very low- plasticity silt, whereas clay-like soil comprises clay and plastic silt. In order to evaluate the clay-like, intermediate, and sand-like behavior of the fined-grained soil at the site, ENGEO plotted PI and liquid limit (LL) of the tested soil relative to the soil behavior limits. Based on site-specific study of the liquefaction hazard, ENGEO conlcuded that the magnitude of the liquefaction/cyclic softening settlement is limited and can be accommodated by the proposed shallow foundation system, such as post tension slab foundations. Additionally, the site specific design required by Mitigation Measure Geology 1 would require implementation of measures to address any liquefaction concerns. Thus, the environmental impact from seismic-related ground failure would be considered to be less than significant. iv) Landslides? (Less Than Significant Impact) In 1975 the United States Geological Survey (USGS) issued photo-interpretation maps of landslide and other surficial deposits of Contra Costa County. This mapping is presented on page 10-24 of the Safety Element of the County General Plan. According to this USGS map, there are no suspected landslides in proximity of the proposed project. Within the site area being considered for development no landslides were identified. Four “definite or probable” landslides are mapped within 1,000 feet of the project site but none poses a hazard to the property. Detailed analysis of the site by Purcell, Rhoades & Associates confirms there are no slides on the parcel. In addition ENGEO conducted a subsequent geotechnical exploration, including borings of the site and determined that no slides occurred on the project site. Thus, a less than significant impact can be expected regarding landslide hazards. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Less Than Significant Impact) During construction, the proposed project would include grading and excavation that would expose a substantial amount of soil. Because the proposed project would disturb more than one acre of land, it would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit from the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) and to comply with its conditions and requirements, which are designed to minimize potential erosion issues. The proposed project would comply with the terms of the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and the County Ordinance Code Chapter 1014-4, which requires the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP includes Best Management Plans (BMPs) to ensure reduction of pollutants from construction activities potentially entering surface waters. Additionally, implementation of the SWPPP would also prevent pollutants from entering surrounding water courses in the project vicinity by preventing pollutants from moving off-site. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with Ordinance Code Division 716, Grading. Division 716 of the Ordinance Code provides regulations to ensure that soil would not be stripped and removed from lands, which can create hazards related to subsidence and faulty drainage. It also ensures grading is regulated to control erosion and sedimentation to protect water quality of water courses and water bodies. For example, Article 716-8.8 of the Ordinance Code would require that all erodible cut slopes more than 5 feet in height and fill slopes more than 3 feet in height be protected against erosion by planting with grass or ground cover plants, subject to review and recommendations provided by a County building official. Furthermore, the proposed project would be landscaped and would not leave disturbed soils exposed. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) As discussed in a) iii above, the project site is in an area that has “moderate to low” liquefaction potential. Building and grading regulations can be expected to keep risks within generally acceptable limits. Furthermore, the site specific recommendations from the Geotechnical report required by Mitigation Measure Geology 1, would ensure any potential geological impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level. Thus, the environmental impact from an unstable geologic unit or soil would be considered to be less than significant. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) With regard to its engineering properties, the surficial clayey soil which potentially indicates high expansion potential. Expansive soil can shrink and swell as a result of moisture changes. This shrinking and swelling can cause heaving and cracking of slabs- on-grade, pavements, and structures founded on shallow foundations. Therefore, construction of at-grade improvements will need to consider the potential impacts of expansive soil. Successful construction on expansive soil requires special attention during grading. It is imperative to keep exposed soil moist by occasional sprinkling. If the soil is dry, it is extremely difficult to remoisturize the soil (because of their clayey nature) without excavation, moisture conditioning, and recompaction. Building damage due to volume changes associated with expansive soil can be reduced by: (1) using a rigid mat foundation that is designed to resist the settlement and heave of expansive soil, (2) deepening the foundations to below the zone of moisture fluctuation, i.e. by using deep footings or drilled piers, and/or (3) using footings at normal shallow depths but bottomed on a layer of select fill having a low expansive potential. Conventional grading operations, incorporating fill placement specifications tailored to the expansive characteristics of the soil, and use of a mat foundation such as a post-tensioned are common, generally cost-effective measures to address the expansive potential of the foundation soils. Detailed foundation design criteria are provided by the project geotechnical report (ENGEO). It should be recognized that expansive soils are an engineering issue, and not a land use or feasibility issue. Thus, the environmental impact from a moderately expansive soil would be considered to be less than significant with incorporation of Mitigation Measure Geology 1. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? (No Impact) The project does not require a septic or wastewater-disposal system; the site receives waste water and sanitary service from the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, who have reviewed the project and stated that sufficient capacity exists to accommodate the project, therefore, no impact is expected. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (Less Than Significant Impact) Similar to archaeological resources, there is a possibility that previously undiscovered buried fossils and other paleontological resources could be present and accidental discovery could occur. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1 and Geology 2 would reduce the potentially significant impact to a less than significant level. No unique geologic features exist on the site. Thus, a less than significant impact would be expected with the included mitigations. Geology 2: The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. Sources of Information • ENGEO, October 4, 2019. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road. • Geologic Peer Review dated October 27, 2006. prepared by Darwin Myers Associates • Geologic Peer Review dated February 10, 2020. prepared by Darwin Myers Associates • Purcell and Rhodes, 2006. Geotechnical Reconnaissance • California Geological Survey, 1992. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Safety Element. • United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2019. Web Soil Survey. Accessed June 4, 2019. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? SUMMARY: a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? (Less Than Significant Impact) Greenhouse gases are gases that trap heat in the atmosphere and contribute to global climate change. Greenhouse gases include gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and various fluorocarbons commonly found in aerosol sprays. Typically, a single residential or commercial construction project in the County would not generate enough greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to substantially change the global average temperature; however, the accumulation of GHG emissions from all projects both within the County and outside the County has contributed and will contribute to global climate change. Senate Bill 97 directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop CEQA Guidelines for evaluation of GHG emissions impacts and recommend mitigation strategies. In response, OPR released the Technical Advisory: CEQA and Climate Change, and proposed revisions to the State CEQA guidelines (April 14, 2009) for consideration of GHG emissions. The California Natural Resources Agency adopted the proposed State CEQA Guidelines revisions on December 30, 2009 and the revisions were effective beginning March 18, 2010. The bright-line numeric threshold of 1,100 MT CO2/yr is a numeric emissions level below which a project’s contribution to global climate change would be less than “cumulatively considerable.” This emissions rate is equivalent to a project size of approximately 60 single-family dwelling units. Future construction and operation of the 10 new residences (8 net new residences as 2 existing homes will be demolished) would generate some GHG emissions; however, the amount generated would not result in a significant adverse environmental impact. As the project does not exceed the screening criteria, the project would not result in the generation of GHG emissions that exceed the threshold of significance. Furthermore, the applicant has provided the following GHG emissions analysis for the project. The proposed project would emit GHG emissions during construction from the off-road equipment, worker vehicles, and any hauling that may occur. The BAAQMD does not presently provide a construction GHG emission threshold but recommends that construction GHG emissions be quantified and disclosed. The BAAQMD also recommends that lead agencies (in this case, Contra Costa County) determine the level of significance of construction GHG emissions. Construction GHG Emissions Construction Phase MT CO 2 e per year Demolition 18 Site Preparation 17 Grading 111 Building Construction 2023 179 Building Construction 2024 124 Paving 4 Architectural Coating 2 Total Construction Emissions 456 Construction Thresholds1 1,100 Exceed Threshold? No Notes: MT CO 2 e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Totals may not add up due to rounding. 1 Construction-related threshold was obtained from SMAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines. Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix A) of the FCS Draft IS/MND Report. As shown in the above Table, the proposed project is expected to emit approximately 456 MT CO2e during construction, which would result in approximately 380 MT CO2e per year (456 divided by 1.2 years). Because the annual average and the total construction emissions would be less than the applied threshold of significance, the project’s construction-related GHG impacts would be less than significant. In order to determine the efficiency thresholds, first FCS determined the 2024 and 2030 CAP reduction target. As shown in Table 3.8 of the Contra Costa County CAP, the County set a 2020 reduction target of 1,193,070 MT CO2e and in 2035 of 596,540 MT CO2e. In order to determine the 2024 and 2030 reduction targets, FCS calculated the yearly GHG reductions that the County would need to make to reach their 2035 calculated reduction target of 596,540 MT CO2e. This calculation showed that the County would need to reduce annual GHG emissions by 36,939 MT CO2e per year. By 2024, after 4 years of projected reduction at a rate of 36,939 MT CO2e, the County would need to emit no more than 1,045,314 MT CO2e and by 2030 after 10 years of reductions, the County would need to emit no more than 751,133 MT CO2e to meet SB 32 goals of GHG emissions 40 percent below the 1990 levels. Next, the County’s GHG reduction target of 1,045,314 MT CO2e in 2024 and 751,133 MT CO2e in 2030 is divided by the estimated 2024 and 2030 unincorporated Contra Costa County service population. According to the Contra Costa County CAP Table 3.4, in 2024 unincorporated Contra Costa County would contain 168,072 residents and 48,378 jobs and 173,500 residents and 50,330 jobs in 2030. As a result, the 2024 efficiency threshold of 4.8 MT CO2e/service population/year and 2030 efficiency threshold of 3.4 MT CO2e/service population/year demonstrates the necessary County per capita GHG emissions needed to be consistent with SB 32 GHG reduction goals. Operational GHG emissions by source are shown in the below Table. The proposed project was analyzed assuming full buildout in the year 2024 immediately following construction. Operational GHG Emissions Emission Source Year 2024 Total Emissions (MT CO 2 e per year)1 Year 2030 Total Emissions (MT CO 2 e per year)1 Area 2 2 Energy 24 24 Mobile (Vehicles) 70 59 Waste 6 6 Water 1 1 Total Project Emissions 103 92 Service Population2 28 28 SB 32 Efficiency Threshold 4.8 MT CO 2 e/service population/year 3.4 MT CO 2 e/service population/year Project Emission Generation (MT CO 2 e/service population/year) 3.73 3.34 Exceeds Threshold? No No Notes: MT CO 2 e=metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 1 Emission totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. 2 Calculation: 2.78 persons per household x 10 dwelling units = 27.8 service population 3 Calculation: 103 MT CO 2 e per year/28 residents = 3.7 MT CO 2 e/service population/year 4 Calculation: 91 MT CO 2 e per year/28 residents = 3.3 MT CO 2 e/service population/year Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix A) of the FCS Draft IS/MND Report California Department of Finance. E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 1/1/2022. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/. Accessed November 7, 2022. As shown in the table, the proposed project would result in operational GHG Emissions of 103 MT CO2e in 2024 and 92 MT CO2e in 2030, which when divided by the service population of 28 residents, would result in 3.7 MT CO2e/service population/year in 2024 and 3.3 MT CO2e/service population/year. Consequently, the proposed project would not exceed the efficiency thresholds and demonstrates that the proposed project would contribute toward meeting the County’s CAP GHG reduction targets and SB 32 GHG emission reduction goals. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, and impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? (Less Than Significant Impact) At a regional scale, the BAAQMD adopted the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan that addresses GHG emissions as well as various criteria air pollutants. The BAAQMD Plan included a number of pollutant reduction strategies for the San Francisco Bay air basin, many of which would be included in the project through Title 24 energy efficiency requirement for the expected new residence. Within Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors convened a Climate Change Working Group (CCWG) in May 2005, to identify existing County activities and policies that could reduce GHG emissions. In November 2005, the CCWG presented its Climate Protection Report to the Board of Supervisors, which included a list of existing and potential GHG reduction measures. This led to the quantification of relevant County information on GHGs in the December 2008 Municipal Climate Action Plan. In April 2012, the Board directed the Department of Conservation and Development to prepare a Climate Action Plan (CAP) to address the reduction of GHG emissions in the unincorporated areas of the County. In December 2015, the Climate Action Plan was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. The Climate Action Plan includes a number of GHG emission reduction strategies. The strategies include measures such as implementing standards for green buildings and energy-efficient buildings, reducing parking requirements, and reducing waste disposal. Green building codes and debris recovery programs are among the strategies currently implemented by the County. The project does not conflict with the policies outlined in the CAP. The project will incorporate Contra Costa County Climate Action Plan (CCC) emission reduction measures (as referenced in Appendix E “Developer Checklist” of the CCC). Implementation of these emission reduction measures is considered a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy under the CCC and therefore meets the BAAQMD’s GHG threshold. Furthermore, as other measures identified in the CAP are recommendations and not requirements, the project would not conflict with the CAP and thus would not be considered to have a significant impact. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update addressing the SB 32 targets was adopted on December 14, 2017. The table below provides an analysis of the proposed project’s consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update measures. As shown in the table, many of the measures are not applicable to the proposed project, and the proposed project is consistent with strategies that are applicable. Consistency with SB 32 2017 Scoping Plan Update 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency SB 350: 50 Percent Renewable Mandate. Utilities subject to the legislation will be required to increase their renewable energy mix from 33 percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030. Not applicable. This measure would apply to utilities and not to individual development projects. The proposed project would purchase electricity from PG&E subject to the SB 350 Renewable Mandate. SB 350: Double Building Energy Efficiency by 2030. This is equivalent to a 20 percent reduction from 2014 building energy usage compared to current projected 2030 levels. Not applicable. This measure applies to existing buildings. New structures are required to comply with Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards that are expected to increase in stringency over time. The proposed project would comply with the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards in effect at the time building permits are received. Low Carbon Fuel Standard. This measure requires fuel providers to meet an 18 percent reduction in carbon content by 2030. Not applicable. This is a statewide measure that cannot be implemented by a project applicant or lead agency. However, vehicles used by future residents at the project site would benefit from the standards. Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels Scenario). Vehicle manufacturers will be required to meet existing regulations mandated by the LEV III and Heavy-Duty Vehicle programs. The strategy includes a goal of having 4.2 million Zero-Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) on the road by 2030 and increasing numbers of ZEV trucks and buses. Not applicable. This measure is not applicable to the proposed project; however, vehicles accessing the project site would benefit from the increased availability of cleaner technology and fuels. In addition, as stipulated by the most recently adopted California Building Code, Title 24, new one-family dwellings, such as the proposed project, would be required to implement the applicable provisions of Title 24, California Building Code to support future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Sustainable Freight Action Plan. The plan’s target is to improve freight system efficiency 25 percent by increasing the value of goods and services produced from the freight sector, relative to the amount of carbon that it produces by 2030. This would be achieved by deploying over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment capable of zero-emission operation and maximize near zero-emission freight vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030. Not Applicable. The proposed project is residential in nature and would not have any major freight vehicles operational. Short-Lived Climate Pollutant (SLCP) Reduction Strategy. The strategy requires the reduction of SLCPs by 40 percent from 2013 levels by 2030 and the reduction of black carbon by 50 percent from 2013 levels by 2030. Consistent. Consistent with BAAQMD Regulation 6, Rule 3, no wood-burning devices are proposed as part of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not include major sources of black carbon. 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies. Requires Regional Transportation Plans to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy for reduction of per capita VMT. Not applicable. The proposed project does not include the development of a Regional Transportation Plan. Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program. The Post 2020 Cap-and-Trade Program continues the existing program for another 10 years. The Cap-and- Trade Program applies to large industrial sources such as power plants, refineries, and cement manufacturers. Not applicable. The proposed project is not one targeted by the cap-and-trade system regulations, and, therefore, this measure does not apply to the proposed project. However, the post-2020 Cap- and-Trade Program indirectly affects people and entities who use the products and services produced by the regulated industrial sources when increased cost of products or services (such as electricity and fuel) are transferred to the consumers. Natural and Working Lands Action Plan. The ARB is working in coordination with several other agencies at the federal, State, and local levels, stakeholders, and with the public, to develop measures as outlined in the Scoping Plan Update and the governor’s Executive Order B-30-15 to reduce GHG emissions and to cultivate net carbon sequestration potential for California’s natural and working land. Not applicable. The proposed project is in a built-up urban area and would not be considered natural or working lands. Source of ARB 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measures: California Air Resource Board (ARB). 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November. Website: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf. Accessed October 25, 2022. Sources of Information • Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017. Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. • Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017. Air Quality Guidelines. • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8. Zoning Ordinance. • Contra Costa County, 2008. Municipal Climate Action Plan. Contra Costa County, 2015. Climate Action Plan. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? SUMMARY: a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Less Than Significant Impact) Subsequent to approval of the Tentative Vesting Parcel Map, it is expected that two existing single-family residence would be demolished and 10 new single family homes constructed on Lots 1-10. There would be associated use of fuels, lubricants, paints, and other construction materials during the construction period. The use and handling of hazardous materials during construction would occur in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, including California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (Cal/OSHA) requirements. With compliance with existing regulations, the project would have a less than significant impact from construction. Project operation would involve the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials in very small quantities as they relate to household use. Contra Costa County regulates household hazard disposal, and the home’s occupants would be responsible for proper handling and disposal of household materials. For example, household hazardous substances can be dropped off for free at one of the Contra Costa County Household Hazardous Waste Drop-off Facilities, located throughout the County. Because any hazardous materials used for household operations would be in small quantities, long‐ term impacts associated with handling, storing, and dispensing of hazardous materials from project operation would be considered less than significant. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed residential use of the site would not involve handling, use, or storage of substances that are acutely hazardous. The lot currently hosts two single family residences. No evidence reviewed by staff suggests that the project would include foreseeable conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment. Thus, with compliance with existing regulations, the project would have a less than significant impact. Historic aerials of the project site dated 1939 through 2018 show that the project site was used for agricultural purposes between 1939 and the 1940s. The houses, which would be demolished as part of the proposed project, were constructed in 1948 and 1959, respectively. Because of the age of the on-site structures, asbestos containing material (ACM) or lead-based paint (LBP) could be present. Because of the potential for ACMs and lead-based paints, the applicant would be required to retain a qualified hazardous materials contractor to remove and dispose of ACMs and LBPs in accordance with federal and State regulations. During project demolition and construction activities, there is always a limited risk of the accidental release of hazardous materials such as gasoline, oil, or fluids from construction equipment. However, use of these materials would be conducted in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, policies, and ordinances set forth by the EPA, State Water Board, DTSC, Cal/OSHA, Caltrans, RCRA, Contra Costa Environmental Health Department, and the CCCFPD. These include, but are not limited to, the following: • California Health and Safety Code Sections 25270.7, 25270.8, and 25507; • California Vehicle Code Section 23112.5; • California Public Utilities Code Section 7673 (PUC General Orders #22-B, 161); • California Government Code Sections 51018 and 8670.25.5(a); • California Water Code Sections 13271 and 13272; • California Labor Code Section 6409.1(b)10; and • NPDES Construction General Permit requirements. Compliance with the provisions of these regulations would help minimize the risk of accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment and that appropriate remediation measures are implemented in the event of an accidental release. As such, impacts related to the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (No Impact) The nearest school is the private school, Pleasant Hill Adventist Academy, located approximately a quarter mile east of the project site. As the project would not be expected to release hazardous materials into the environment, no impact on the school is expected. In addition, while construction of the proposed project could create hazardous emissions during construction, these emissions would be temporary, and the project applicant is required to comply with all safe transport, handling, and disposal requirements and regulations. Operation of the proposed single-family homes would not result in the emission or handling of large quantities of hazardous materials, substances, or waste. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (No Impact) The project site currently contains two single-family residences. A review of regulatory databases maintained by County, State, and federal agencies found no documentation of hazardous materials violations or discharge on the project site. The site is not listed on the State of California Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites (Cortese) List. California Government Code section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. The Cortese List is a planning document with hazardous material contaminated site information, used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. Because the project is not located on a listed hazardous materials site the project will not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment. e) For a project located within an airport land 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? (No Impact) The project site is not within an airport influence area, not within an airport safety zone, and outside of the 55-60 dB CNEL airport noise contour. Thus, there would be no hazard related to a public airport or public use airport. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with the County’s adopted emergency response plan related to Grayson Road or the project site. Thus, project impacts on emergency response would be a less than significant. The proposed access road off of Grayson Road and the additional 10 single-family residences (8 net new single-family residences) located on the proposed private access road is not expected to have any significant impact on emergency evacuation plans within the area. As described in the Public Services section, the project site is in close proximity to both the Office of the Sheriff and CCCFPD stations. The CCCFPD would review project plans prior to project approval to ensure that adequate emergency access to the proposed buildings would be adequate. Construction and operation of the proposed project would not interfere with access to Grayson Road, which would be the project area’s most likely evacuation route. Therefore, adjacent neighborhoods would not be impeded by the proposed project’s construction. Impacts would be less than significant. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site is currently in a developed area within the urbanized community of Contra Costa County, which is designated as an “urban unzoned” area by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (DFFP). The DFFP’s Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map’s, adopted in 2007, characterize this area as a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone area. The recently updated draft 2022 maps from the DFFP now characterize the site as in a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. While the project is located in an High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the project site is located in an area that is mostly surrounded by other residential development, which reduces wildfire risks. Additionally, the proposed project would result in the removal of vegetation across the vacant site, further reducing the risk of wildfires. The proposed project would be designed and managed according to regulations provided in the County Ordinance 2019-37, the CCCFPD Ordinance, which would include design standards and management regulations, such as weed abatement and brush clearance regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. Compliance with these regulations, as well as the proposed project design and vegetation removal, the proposed project would have not result in the exposure of people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. Impacts would be less than significant. Sources of Information • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). 2009. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA Map. • Contra Costa County, 2000. Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Transportation and Circulation Element. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? SUMMARY: a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would comply with applicable water quality and discharge requirements. Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and 16 incorporated cities in the county have formed the Contra Costa Clean Water Program. In 2015, the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region (RWQCB) adopted the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP Order No. R2-2015- 0049) for the Program, which regulates discharges from municipal storm drains. Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit places requirements on site design to minimize creation of impervious surfaces and control stormwater runoff. The County has the authority to enforce compliance with its Municipal Regional Permit through the County’s adopted C.3 requirements. The C.3 requirements stipulate that projects creating and/or redeveloping at least 5,000 square feet of impervious surface shall treat stormwater runoff with permanent stormwater management facilities, along with measures to control runoff rates and volumes. The proposed project would add an estimated 50,825 square feet of new impervious surface area. The C.3 requirements stipulate that projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface must incorporate specific measures to reduce runoff, such as dispersion of runoff to vegetated areas, use of pervious pavement, installation of cisterns, and installation of bioretention facilities or planter boxes. Implementation of these measures would be required as a condition of approval. Design of the new project will include the installation of a single C3 compliant low impact development (LID) flowthrough treatment planter to act as a source control, treating all replaced impervious surfaces prior to connecting to the public storm drain system. No direct storm water discharge would be placed within Grayson Creek. All storm water would be metered and cleaned by the C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter. With implementation of the practicable stormwater controls, the project would be compliant with applicable water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, resulting in a less than significant impact. b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? (Less Than Significant Impact) The site is in the water service area from the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). After construction of the new residence, water service to the building would be provided by EBMUD. Since any future water service at the site will be provided by EBMUD, no groundwater wells will be required. The design of the C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter would maintain existing ground water recharging that currently occurs on the site resulting in a less than significant impact. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the area or change the course of Grayson Creek. In the preliminary stormwater review, the grading pattern of the property will follow the existing drainage pattern and will ultimately connect to an existing drainage located along the northeast side of the project site after the water is detained and treated in a C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter. Accordingly, the proposed project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the site or area or result in substantial erosion or siltation. The additional impervious surface flows will be directed to a single C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter to act as a source control, treating all replaced impervious surfaces prior to connecting to the public storm drain system. No direct storm water discharge would be placed within Grayson Creek. All storm water would be metered and cleaned by the C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter, prior to the indirect discharge into Grayson Creek. With implementation of the practicable stormwater controls, the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation, resulting in a less than significant impact. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Less Than Significant Impact) As described previously, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area nor would it substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff. Thus, the project would not result in any significant impacts associated with an increase in the volume of runoff that would result in onsite or off-site flooding. iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site includes 3.05 acres of gently sloping terrain adjacent to an existing creek (Grayson Creek). Higher elevations along the westerly boundary are at approximate elevation of 116 feet (local datum) and 110 along Grayson Road. The site slopes southeasterly to Grayson Creek with top of bank elevations at approximately 90 feet, with creek waterlines around elevation 80. Grayson Creek drains northeasterly along the project’s boundary. An existing 24” reenforced concrete pipe within Grayson Road currently collects stormwater runoff from upstream properties. The 24” storm drain pipe connects to 2 6x6 concrete boxes under Grayson Creek and discharges water directly to Grayson Creek. The project will connect into the existing 24” storm drain pipe within Grayson Road, just to the east of storm drain man hole (SDMH) #32. The existing 24” storm drain pipe will remain undisturbed by development of the site. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24-inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff. This would ensure that project runoff would not exceed existing conditions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be necessary. iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? (Less Than Significant Impact) As described above, Grayson Creek, which runs through portions of the project site, is in a FEMA Flood Zone A, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annual-chance flood event. With construction of the proposed project, the runoff rate at the project site would increase by 41.2 percent without stormwater detention. Given this volume of stormwater, a 555-cubic-foot detention basin would be required by the County. However, most runoff on the project site would be directed to a 674-cubic-foot bioretention basin located adjacent to Lot 2 for treatment. Once treated, runoff would be directed to the public storm drainpipe beneath Grayson Road. A portion of the runoff would bypass this treatment system and instead enter the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24-inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff, even in a 100-year storm event. This would put the proposed project in compliance with the CCCWP, which requires that runoff be reduced to at or below existing conditions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? (Less Than Significant Impact) According to Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 06013C0280G, all of the proposed improvements from the project are located in area that is outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area. Additionally, as discussed above, the proposed project would utilize a bioretention basin with capacity beyond what is required, as well as the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road to treat storm waters. The proposed stormwater treatment system would have adequate capacity for a 100-year storm event. The proposed project would not be susceptible to inundation by seiche or tsunami. The California Geological Survey (2009) has projected and mapped the tsunami hazard posed by a tidal wave that passes through the Golden Gate and into San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay and Carquinez Strait. The project site is not included in the inundation area on any tsunami hazard map. e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? (Less Than Significant Impact) As stated above, the proposed project would comply with applicable water quality and discharge requirements and will not install or utilize any groundwater wells on the Project site. Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit places requirements on site design to minimize creation of impervious surfaces and control stormwater runoff. Thus the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), effective January 1, 2015, established a framework of priorities and requirements to facilitate sustainable groundwater management throughout the State. The intent of SGMA is for groundwater to be managed by local public agencies and newly-formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to ensure a groundwater basin is operated within its sustainable yield through the development and implementation of a Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP). The project is located near the San Ramon Valley and Ygnacio Valley Basins, both of which are Very Low Priority groundwater basins based on the Groundwater Basin Prioritization by the State Department of Water Resources (DWR). No sustainable groundwater management plan has been prepared for the basins due to their low priority status. Sources of Information • California Department of Water Resources. https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Groundwater-Management • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). National Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-flood-hazard- mapping. • Debolt Civil Engineering. 2021. Preliminary Hydrology and Storm Water Detention Report for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road SD 20-9531 • Debolt Civil Engineering. 2021. Preliminary Storm Water Control Plan for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road SD 20-9531 • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 11. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? SUMMARY: a) Would the project physically divide an established community? (No Impact) Development of the proposed project would not physically divide an established community. The proposed project will occur on a developed parcel within a residential portion of unincorporated Pleasant Hill. b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Less Than Significant Impact) General Plan The proposed project would conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. The project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. Conservatively calculating the Project’s density based on the net project site acreage of approximately 2.76 acres (2.76 acres x 2.9 du/ac =8.004 du), each fractional unit rounds to the next whole unit, or 9 base units pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(5). The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household (12% of 9 base lots), therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915, subdivision (b)(1)(D). By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit (9 du x.07 = 9.63, which rounds up to 10). (Gov. Code, § 65915(f)(4), (5).) The density of the proposed project would be 3.62 dwelling units per net acre, which would be deemed consistent with the SL Land Use designation density range of 1 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre as a result of the utilization of a Density Bonus. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. Category Totals Total Area = 3.05 Acres Private Right-of-way = 0.29 Acres Net Area= 2.76 acres 2.76 Net Acres X 2.9 = base units 9 base units 1 moderate unit / base units= 11.11% (rounds up to 12%)2 10% moderate income density bonus= 7% Density Bonus Calculation 9 (base units) x .07= (9.63) Bonus 10 units 2 Government Code section 65915(f)(5). The County’s land use compatibility standards contained in Figure 11-6 of the Noise Element, ambient noise environments are considered normally acceptable for new single- family residential land use development with noise levels ranging up to 60 A-weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)/day/night average sound level (Ldn). Environments with noise levels from 55 dBA to70 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered conditionally acceptable for new single-family land use development; and such development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Environments with noise levels from 70 dBA to 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered normally unacceptable for new single-family land use development, and clearly unacceptable for levels above 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Two noise measurement surveys were taken to determine existing noise levels at the project site. The dominant noise source in the project vicinity was found to be traffic noise on adjacent roadways and lawnmowing. The noise survey documented that existing ambient noise levels on the project site range from 61 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq), as measured at approximately 20 feet from the edge of Grayson Road, to 47 dBA Leq at the project boundary adjoining 2043 Mohawk Drive property. The noise measurement survey files are included in the FCS Draft IS/MND report. These noise measurements were taken during the peak noise hours of the day, and represent the expected highest hourly average noise levels that are experienced on the project site. Resulting 24-hour average noise levels would be even lower when averaged with quieter hours of the day. Therefore, the existing ambient noise environment of the project site is within the conditionally acceptable range for new residential land use development. For conditionally acceptable noise environments, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems, will normally suffice. Based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels, with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for multi- family residential developments would provide 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA or more with windows open. The proposed project will include alternative ventilation systems such as mechanical air conditioning whick will allow windows to remain closed for prolonged periods of time, sufficiently reducing traffic noise levels to meet the interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 61 dBA - 25 dBA = 36 dBA). Zoning The project would be considered consistent with the R-15 Single-family zoning district as a result of the utilization of the Density Bonus, pursuant to Government Code sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) and County Ordinance Code Section 822-2. The State Density Bonus Law provides for unlimited number of waivers of development standards in order to construct the project at the proposed density. (See Gov. Code, § 65915(b)(1), (e)(1).) Where a development standard would physically prevent the project from being built at the permitted density and with the granted concessions/incentives, the developer may propose to have those standards waived or reduced. The applicant is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 (instead of 100 feet); (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; (d) a reduction in minimum front yard and side yard setback and (e) a waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls. The proposed lot sizes, lot width, depth, and setbacks, are shown in Table 1 on the following page. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers as application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit and with the application of the available incentives, concessions, and density bonus. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. The project would be considered consistent with the General Plan and the R-15 Single- family zoning district as a result of the utilization of the Density Bonus, pursuant to Government Code sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5), accordingly there is no significant impact resulting from the project. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2022. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Land Use Element. • California Government Code Section 65915 • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California Table 1 1024 & 1026 Grayson Rd. Proposed Alternative Development Standards (R-15 Standards) Lot # Area ( 15,000 Sq. Ft.) Depth (100 Ft. Min.) Average Width (100 Ft. Min.) Front Yard Setback (20 feet) Side Yard Setback (25 feet aggregate, no yard less than 10 feet) Retaining Walls 6’ or less Lot 1 7,347 87.45 84.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 2 22,460 331 67.85 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 3 15,236 270 56.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 4 14,257 144 99.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 5 14,713 195 75.45 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 6 11,261 163 69.09 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 7 11,360 166 68.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 8 13,388 185 72.37 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 9 13,655 173 78.93 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 10 14,013 220 63.70 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ 12. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? SUMMARY: a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (No Impact) Known mineral resource areas in the County are shown on Figure 8-4 (Mineral Resource Areas) of the General Plan Conservation Element. No known mineral resources have been identified in the project vicinity, and therefore the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resource. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (No Impact) The project site is not within an area of known mineral importance according to the Conservation Element of the General Plan, and therefore, the project would not impact any mineral resource recovery site. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020, Conservation Element. 13. NOISE – Would the project result in: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land 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? SUMMARY: a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?(Less Than Significant Impact) Activities at the future 10-lot subdivision are not expected to expose persons to, or generate, noise levels in excess of the Community Noise Exposure Levels shown on Figure 11-6 of the General Plan Noise Element. Figure 11-6 shows that levels of 60 dB or less are normally acceptable and noise levels between 60 dB to 70 dB are conditionally acceptable in residential areas. Types and levels of noise generated from the residential uses associated with the future residence would be similar to noise levels from the existing residential developments in the area. Thus, project noise impacts to the existing surrounding land uses would be less than significant. Furthermore, the Noise Element of the General Plan establishes the following noise policies that may be applicable to the project. Policy 11-1 New projects shall be required to meet acceptable exterior noise level standards as established in the Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines contained in Figure 11-6 [of the Noise Element]. These guidelines, along with the future noise levels shown in the future noise contours maps, should be used by the County as a guide for evaluating the compatibility of “noise-sensitive” projects in potentially noisy areas. Policy 11-2 The standard for outdoor noise levels in residential areas is an Ldn of 60 dB. However, an Ldn of 60 dB or less may not be achievable in all residential areas due to economic or aesthetic constraints. One example is small balconies associated with multi-family housing. In this case, second and third story balconies may be difficult to control to the goal. A common outdoor use area that meets the goal can be provided as an alternative. Policy 11-8 Construction activities shall be concentrated during the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of scrapers, dozers, water trucks, haul trucks, and pickup trucks. The maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from this equipment. Each dozer would also generate 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by graders is approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. A characteristic of sound is that each doubling of sound sources with equal strength increases a sound level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance from the other equipment, a reasonable worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the acoustic center of a construction area. The effect on sensitive receptors is evaluated below. The closest noise-sensitive receptors to the proposed project site are single-family residences located directly east of the project site. The calculated reasonable worst-case noise levels could result in hourly average noise levels of up to 80 dBA Leq, at the façade of the nearest receiving residential land use when equipment operate at the nearest project boundary for a full hour. However, these reasonable worst-case construction noise levels would occur only periodically throughout the day as construction equipment operate along the nearest project boundaries. Additionally, these noise levels would drop off at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance as the equipment moves over the project site. Based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels, with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for residential developments would provide a minimum of 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed. During the calculated loudest phase of construction described above the interior noise levels of the nearest off-site residences would be reduced to below 55 dBA Leq, which would not be considered a substantial noise impact for daytime noise levels. The County of Contra Costa restricts construction activities to the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. Therefore, restricting construction activity to daytime hours, as well as implementing the best management noise reduction techniques and practices outlined in Mitigation Measure Noise 1, would ensure that construction noise would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels that would result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure Noise 1, temporary construction noise impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Noise 1: To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: • The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. • At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. • The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. • The construction contractor shall limit noise producing construction activities to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturday. No such activities shall be permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. As shown in the analysis by FCS, the calculated reasonable worst-case operational noise levels from proposed mechanical ventilation equipment operations would not exceed existing measured ambient noise levels in the project area, and would therefore not result in a substantial permanent increase in noise levels in excess of established standards. Therefore, the impact of mechanical ventilation equipment operational noise levels on off-site sensitive receptors would be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in traffic noise levels compared with traffic noise levels existing without the project. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. A change of 5 dBA is considered the minimum readily perceptible change to the human ear in outdoor environments. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, an increase of 5 dBA or greater above existing noise levels would be considered a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels. Another characteristic of noise is that a doubling of sound sources with equal strength is required to result in a perceptible increase (defined to be a 3 dBA or greater) in noise levels. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak period trip generation rates for single-family dwelling residences estimate of 1.0 trip per dwelling unit. The proposed project would develop 10 single-family residences, meaning it would generate an additional 10 AM and 8 PM new peak period trips. These peak-hour trips would not double the existing peak-hour or daily average traffic volumes on Grayson Road adjacent to the project site. As a result, the proposed project would not result in even a 3 dBA increase in traffic noise levels along any roadway segment in the project vicinity, and any increase would be well below the 5 dBA increase that would be considered substantial. Therefore, impacts from project-related traffic noise levels would not result in a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels in excess of applicable standards, and the impact would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Less than Significant) Project construction would not include any components (e.g. pile-driving) that would generate excessive groundborne vibration levels. Thus, project noise impacts associated with groundborne vibration would be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land 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? (No Impact) As discussed in Section 9.e, the project site is not within an airport influence area, not within an airport safety zone, and outside of the 55-60 dB CNEL airport noise contour. Thus, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from an airport use. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020, Noise Element. • Contra Costa County, 2000. Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California 14. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? SUMMARY: a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Less Than Significant) According to the California Department of Finance (CDF), the County’s estimated population as of January 1, 2022 was approximately 1,156,555. The unincorporated area of the County had an estimated population of 176,941 as of January 1, 2022. The County has an average of 2.79 persons per household as of January 2022. The proposed project would result in the development of eight additional single-family residences (net), which would directly increase the unincorporated Pleasant Hill area population by an estimated 28 persons, based on the Census 2010 estimate of 2.79 people per household for Contra Costa County. The development is limited to the project site, and would not be expected to lead to indirect population growth. Further, due to its small scope and size (less than .02% of the estimated annual population growth for the unincorporated County), the project would have a less than significant impact on population growth in the area. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Less Than Significant) The project site is currently occupied by two unoccupied single-family residences which would be demolished, and the proposed project is expected to result in the construction of ten new single family residences (eight net). Therefore, the project would have no impact on housing displacement. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County, Census 2010. Accessed June 6, 2019. http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/counties/ContraCostaCounty.htm 15. PUBLIC SERVICES – 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: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Fire Protection? b) Police Protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? SUMMARY: 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: a) Fire Protection? (Less Than Significant Impact) Fire protection services for the County are provided by the CCCFPD, which has 36 stations serving the County, including two stations within two miles of the project site. The nearest station to the project site is located at Station 5 at 205 Boyd Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.72 miles from the project site. The expected time of travel from Station 5 to the project site is approximately 4 to 5 minutes. Another fire station, Station 2, is located at 2012 Geary Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.74 miles south of the project site. In 2018, the CCCFPD had an average response time of 5 minutes and 35 seconds, which is above the target total response time of 5 minutes set by the County’s General Plan. According to the General Plan Goal 7-Y, upgrades to facilities and staff are regularly reviewed for the CCCFPD to achieve the target response time. As described in Section 2.14 Population and Housing, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 28 new residents in the County. This is less than a 0.02 percent increase in population growth for unincorporated areas of the County. The proposed project would add less than 0.01 percent to the total population and would therefore have a negligible impact on the CCCFPD’s ability to provide adequate fire protection and emergency medical services to its service area. The proposed project would also be reviewed by the County Fire Marshall for compliance with Title 7, Division 722 of the Ordinance Code, also known as the County’s Fire Code. The proposed project would also submit applicable fire prevention fees required by CCCFPD Ordinance 2021-18. As such, impacts from the proposed project to fire protection services would be less than significant. b) Police Protection? (Less Than Significant Impact) Law enforcement services are provided by the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff. The Office of the Sheriff serves over 1.1 million residents throughout the County, including the 164,000 residents from unincorporated areas. In 2021, the Office of the Sheriff received over 381,605 calls for service, of which nearly 78,223 were 911 calls. The Muir Station, which serves the project site is located at 1980 Muir Road in the City of Martinez, approximately 2.94 miles north of the project site. Muir Station is staffed by one Lieutenant, five Sergeants, 23 Deputies, one Community Service Officer, one Crime Prevention Specialist, and three volunteers. The Office of the Sheriff aims to have a maximum response time goal for priority 1 or 2 calls of five minutes for 90 percent of all emergency responses in central business district, urban and suburban areas. As described in Section 2.14 Population and Housing, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 28 new residents in the County, which is less than a 0.003 percent increase above the 1.1 million people currently served by the Office of the Sheriff. Other General Plan Public Protection Policies 7-57 through to 7-61 would prevent future growth that exceeds the community capability to provide police services. For example, Policy 7-57 required a Sheriff facility standard of 155 square feet of station area per 1,000 population. Additionally, all future developments, including the proposed project, are required to pay Land Development Fees in relation to police protection services. As such impacts from the proposed project to police protection services would be less than significant. c) Schools? (Less Than Significant Impact) The Mount Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) currently serves the project area, in addition to the Cities of Clayton, Concord, Pleasant Hill, Pittsburg, Walnut Creek, portions of the City of Martinez and the unincorporated communities of Bay Point, Lafayette, and Pacheco. In 2021, the MDUSD enrolled 29,582 students. The County has approximately 22.2 percent of its population under the age of 18. The nearest schools to the project site include: • Strandwood Elementary School, located approximately 1.05 miles east of the project site; • Pleasant Hill Middle School, located approximately 1.68 miles southeast of the project site; and • College Park High School located approximately 1.62 miles northeast of the project site. As noted above, the proposed project includes the development of 10 single-family residential housing units, which would result in approximately 28 new residents to the County and a direct impact to the local school population. As described above, approximately 22.2 percent of the County is under the age of 18. Therefore, we can estimate that the proposed project would result in approximately six new students in the MDUSD, resulting in a negligible increase of approximately 0.02 percent in MDUSD’s 29,582 student population. In addition, the MDUSD regularly reviews its capacity and staffing with the County Office of Education to meet the demands of the communities it services. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate a significant demand for new or expanded school facilities, and the impacts would be less than significant. d) Parks? (Less Than Significant Impact) The nearest park facilities to the project site include Rodgers-Smith Park, Pinewood Park, Shannon Hills Park, Brookwood Park, and Dinosaur Hill Park, all of which are located within 1 mile of the project site and serviced by the Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District. The Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District served a population of approximately 41,241 as of 2019 and is expecting to observe an increased demand in parks to 46,688 people in 2032, a total increase of 5,447 people. In addition, portions of Briones Regional Park are within 1 mile of the project site. Briones Regional Park is serviced by the East Bay Regional Park District. The East Bay Regional Park District serves Alameda and Contra Costa counties, which represent a combined population of 2,809,969. The proposed project would generate approximately 28 new residents to the unincorporated area around the project site. Parks in the surrounding area would be directly impacted by the additional demand generated by the proposed project’s residents. As noted above, there are multiple parks within a 1-mile radius of the project site, served by the Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District (Park District). As described above, the Park District served a population of approximately 41,241 in 2019 and is expecting to observe an increased demand in parks to 46,688 people in 2032, a total increase of 5,447 people. Therefore, the demand that would be generated by 28 residents from the proposed project would be accounted for by the Park District. The project site is also within a mile of Briones Regional Park, which is maintained by the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD). The EBRPD serves Alameda and Contra Costa counties, which represents a combined population of 2,809,969. In addition, the EBRPD Master Plan recorded a growth in visitors of 4.6 percent in Alameda County and 10.6 percent in Contra Costa County from 2000 to 2010, and thus projected further park visitors as a management goal for the future. As such, existing park services would be able to serve the residents of the proposed project and the proposed project would not result in the need for new park facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e) Other public facilities? (Less Than Significant Impact) Impacts to other public facilities, such as hospitals and libraries are usually caused by substantial increases in population. Implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to induce population growth since only eight (net) new residence would result from project approval. The project is not anticipated to create substantial additional service demands besides those which have been preliminarily reviewed by various agencies of Contra Costa County, or result in adverse physical impacts associated with the delivery of fire, police, schools, parks, or other public services. Other public facilities such as libraries would be marginally impacted by the proposed project’s generation of approximately 28 new residents. Library services to the County are provided by the Contra Costa County Library, which provides services to the project site through the Pleasant Hill branch on 2 Monticello Avenue, approximately 1.7 miles from the project site. The library system currently has approximately 350,000 active users. In addition, the proposed project is consistent with its SL–Low land use designation, and the population increase of 28 persons is considered planned growth per the County’s General Plan Housing Element. The Contra Costa County Library Strategic Plan states its intent, under Goal 1, Objective D, to increase the number of active users in the library system by 10 percent annually, which given the current userbase of would be an increase of approximately 35,000 users. Therefore, the increase of potential users from the proposed project’s 28 expected new residents would already be accounted for by the Contra Costa County Library. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. January 30, 20202. Agency Comment Letter. 16. RECREATION Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? SUMMARY: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Less Than Significant Impact) Major park facilities in the County are owned by the federal and State governments, along with an extensive system owned and operated by the EBRPD, as well as water district watershed recreation facilities. The General Plan Open Space Element Table 9- 1, County Park Criteria, identifies a service standard of 2.50 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks and 1.50 acres per 1,000 population for community parks. Though the project site is in the unincorporated County, it is within the Park District. The Park District is a Special District separate from the City of Pleasant Hill and other governments and governed under the Public Resources Code of the State of California and serves over 40,000 people. The Park District consists of 13 parks encompassing 126 acres as well as developed and undeveloped open space encompassing 115 acres. Park District facilities within 1 mile of the project site are listed below. The park nearest the project site is Rodgers-Smith Park, located approximately 0.41 mile to the east. • Rodgers-Smith Park–730 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA • Rodger’s Ranch Heritage Center–315 Cortsen Road, Pleasant Hill, CA • Dinosaur Hill Park–901 Taylor Boulevard Pleasant Hill, CA • Brookwood Park–3250 Withers Avenue Lafayette, CA • Pinewood Park–Monti Circle, Pleasant Hill, CA • Shannon Hills Park–202 Devon Avenue, Pleasant Hill, CA • Winslow Center–2590 Pleasant Hill Rd, Pleasant Hill, CA Additionally, the project site is located approximately 0.81 mile east of the eastern boundary of Briones Regional Park. Briones Regional Park is a 6,256-acre regional park offering hiking, biking, horseback riding trails as well as bird watching, picnicking, archery range, group camping and other recreational activities. Briones Regional Park is managed by the EBRPD. The proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 28 new residents to the County, which would only slightly increase demand for existing park and recreation facilities in the vicinity of the project site. However, the project applicant would be required to pay the required park dedication and park impact fees collected to fund the acquisition and development of parks in the County to serve unincorporated County residents. Thus, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Less Than Significant Impact) Given the proximity of nearby parks, the new residents would likely use these nearby facilities. As described above, use of these public recreational facilities by the residents of the new dwelling units would incrementally increase use of the facilities, but would not be expected to result in the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. 17. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? SUMMARY: a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? (Less Than Significant Impact) Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan requires a traffic impact analysis of any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak period trip generation rates of 1.0 trip per dwelling unit for single-family residences, the proposed project consisting of the ten-lot subdivision, and the future construction of 10 single-family residence (8 net new units) would generate an additional eight AM and eight PM new peak period trips, and therefore, is not required to have a project-specific traffic impact analysis. Since the project would yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, the proposed project would not conflict with the circulation system in the Pleasant Hill area. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right of way for each category of users be incorporated into all planning, funding, design, approval, and implementation processes for any construction, reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, operations, alteration, or repair of streets (including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system). Projects may seek exemptions from the policy based upon 4 potential exemptions outlined in Section C.1 of the policy. Specifically, this project has sought the exemption provided for in C.1(2): “inclusion of Complete Streets design principles would result in a disproportionate cost to the project.” The proposed subdivision project includes a new 28-foot wide access road which would permit two 10-foot travel lanes and an 8-foot wide parking on one side of the street. Additionally a 5-foot wide, monolithic, elevated sidewalk would be constructed adjacent to the new road to provide access for pedestrians and persons with disabilities within the project. Along the project frontage, the project will provide a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping in-lieu of complete frontage improvements. Improved frontage improvements are defined as curb, gutter pan, and a sidewalk. No complete frontage improvements exist along the southern portion of Grayson Road, from the intersection of Reliez Valley Road to the west and Heritage Hills Drive to the East (that road segment is in is in excess of 2,000 feet in length). Complete frontage improvements would be prohibitively expensive given the length of the project frontage (354 feet), the required grading, tree removal, and utility requirements. In addition, there is no sidewalk along the southern side of Grayson Road to connect with, in 1,000 feet in either direction. The adjacent properties that front along Grayson Road are not expected to develop in the future. Finally, existing Grayson Road has adequate width to support two travel lanes, parking, and a bike lane. Therefore the overall the surrounding circulation system is consistent with the Complete Streets policy and qualifies for an exemption as outlined in Section C.1(2) of the Policy. Moreover, the Density Bonus law provides for regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs. (Gov. Code § 65915(d)(1)). The Density Bonus Law puts the burden of rejecting any proposed incentives or concessions on the County and requires the County to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the County makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions; (B) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households; (C) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. The Density Bonus application submitted to the County has requested that the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)? (Less Than Significant Impact) The California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) establishes criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts. Vehicle Miles Traveled (“VMT”) is the metric for measuring transportation impacts. The County adopted Transportation Analysis Guidelines (2020) providing technical assistance, thresholds of significance and mitigation measures for land development projects. Per County guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA. The project proposes 10 (eight net) residential units which is under the County guidelines VMT screening criteria threshold. Therefore, the project should be considered to have a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and would not require a VMT analysis. c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (Less Than Significant Impact) According to the project’s Civil Engineer, the center line of the proposed project’s access road from Grayson Road is located approximately 164 feet to the east of the existing Golf Links Street (located to the north) and 280-feet to the west of the existing Buttner road (located to the north east). Both of these roads are minor roads with low vehicle counts that have no through connections and serve only the single-family homes located directly on them. The proposed new access road is located in excess of 150 feet of either center line of Buttner and Golf Links roads, consistent with ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) recommendations for intersection separation on 35 MPH streets, such as Grayson Road. In addition, cars traveling either eastbound or westbound on Grayson road have over 500- feet of sight distance, which is more than adequate to provide for adequate stopping time on the 35 MPH designated Grayson road. Thus, the project would result in a less than significant impact due to design features or incompatible uses. d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project is located in an urban residential neighborhood with available emergency services provided by the County Sheriff’s Department and Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. Furthermore, prior to the County review of construction drawings for building permits, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District would review the construction drawings and ensure that adequate emergency access to buildings on the project site could be provided. Thus, a less than significant impact is expected due to emergency access. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. • Contra Costa County, July 12, 2016. Complete Streets Policy • Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development, Transportation Division, March 26 2021. Comment Letter • DeBolt Civil Engineering, March 26 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • DeBolt Civil Engineering, June 8, 2020. Response to Comments Letter to Joseph Lawlor • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Land Use Element. • California Government Code Section 65915 18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? SUMMARY: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations) As discussed in Sections 5.a through 5.c above, no historical resources are known to exist on the project site. On February 5, 2007, Suzanne Baker of Archaeological/ Historical Consultants conducted an on-foot archaeological reconnaissance of the project area. No prehistoric or historic (over 50 years of age) archaeological sites or materials were found on-site during the course of reconnaissance. Further, according to the County’s Archaeological Sensitivities map, Figure 9-2, of the County General Plan, the subject site is located in an area that is considered “largely urbanized,” and is generally not considered to be a location with significant archaeological resources. Given all of these factors, there is little potential for the project to impact tribal cultural resources on the site. Pertaining to the significance of tribal cultural resources, there are no onsite historical resources, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k ) that are included in a local register of historic resources. Nevertheless, the expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures Cultural Resources 1 and Cultural Resources 2 would reduce the impact on tribal cultural resources during project related work to a level that would be considered less than significant. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations) As discussed in Sections 5.a through 5.c above, no historical resources are likely to exist on the project site. Further, according to the County’s Archaeological Sensitivities map, Figure 9-2, of the County General Plan, the subject site is located in an area that is considered “largely urbanized,” and is not considered to be a location with significant archaeological resources. Thus, there is little potential for the project to impact tribal cultural resources on the site. It is not likely that the project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that meets the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, for the reasons stated above. Nevertheless, the expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1 and Cultural Resources 2 would reduce the impact on tribal cultural resources during project related work to a less than significant level. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Open Space Element. • Archaeological Survey and Historic Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Archaeological/Historical Consultants dated February 2007 19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater 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? d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? SUMMARY: a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site has been previously developed and is currently connected to wastewater, electric, gas, and telecommunication facilities. Agency comment letter received by Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), and the County Public Works Department have stated that adequate facilities would be available to accommodate the project. Thus, no significant environmental effects are expected from the construction of new facilities that would be required to provide services to the project. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site would receive water service from EBMUD. EBMUD has reviewed the project application documents regarding the provision of new water service pursuant to EBMUD water service regulations and stated that adequate water service is available. Accordingly, the impact of providing water service to the proposed project would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater 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? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site is already serviced by Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. The district has provided comments stating that the project’s addition of eight (net) new single family homes would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity demand on the wastewater system. As proposed, the project would not result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would generate construction solid waste and post-construction operational solid waste. Construction waste would be hauled to one of the recycling centers and/or transfer stations located in the area. The recycling center and/or transfer station would sort through the material and pull out recyclable materials. Future construction of the proposed project would incrementally add to the construction waste headed to a landfill; however, the impact of the project-related incremental increase would be considered to be less than significant. Furthermore, construction on the project site would be subject to the CalGreen Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Program administered by the CDD at the time of application for a building permit. The Debris Recovery Program would reduce the construction debris headed to the landfill by diverting materials that could be recycled to appropriate recycling facilities. With respect to residential waste, the receiving landfill for operational waste is Keller Canyon, located at 901 Bailey Road in Bay Point. Keller Canyon is estimated to be at 15 percent of capacity. Residential waste from, the expected one new dwelling unit would incrementally add to the operational waste headed to the landfill; however, the impact of the project-related residential waste is considered to be less than significant. As is the case with construction debris, a portion of the residential waste is expected to be recycled, and would thereby reduce the residential waste headed to the landfill. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws related to solid waste. The project includes residential land uses that would not result in the generation of unique types of solid waste that would conflict with existing regulations applicable to solid waste. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Public Facilities Element • East Bay Municipal Utility District, February 10, 2020. Comment Letter • Central Contra Costa Sanitary District February 6, 2020. Comment Letter • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California 20. WILDFIRE – If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby, expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? SUMMARY: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Less than Significant) As discussed in section 9.g above, the project site is in a developed area within the urbanized community of Contra Costa County, which is designated as an “urban unzoned” area by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Additionally, the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map characterizes this area as a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone area. However, newly published draft maps identify the area as located in a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. As indicated in the Public Services Section above, the proposed project would be adequately served by police and fire services. Additionally, the proposed project would comply with County General Plan Policy 7-64, which requires new development to pay fair share costs for new fire protection facilities and services. Measure 7-au also provides fire protection agencies the opportunity to review projects and submit conditions of approval for consideration to determine whether road widths, road grades and turnaround radii are adequate for emergency equipment, among other considerations. For these reasons, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to emergency response or emergency evacuation. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby, expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? (Less than Significant) As detailed previously, the project site is likely to be located within an High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The General Plan identifies the project site as being in an area with slopes of less than 26 percent degrees. Project site elevations range from approximately Elevation 165 feet in the northeast corner of the site up to approximately Elevation 187 feet along the northwest boundary, sloping toward the east and south. Furthermore, the BAAQMD monitoring stations provide wind speed data from several monitoring stations in the eastern zone of the San Francisco Bay Area. The station nearest the project site is located in Concord, CA approximately 2.88 miles northeast of the project site. The average monthly wind speed recorded at this monitoring location in 2020 ranged from 7 mph to 16 mph. Therefore, the project site would not be exposed to high winds which could exacerbate wildfire risks. Furthermore, the proposed project is surrounded by existing roads and residential development which would reduce risks associated with wildfire. The proposed project would also be required to adhere to all applicable requirements and regulations related to fire safety, including the California Fire Code and CBC. The proposed project would also be subject to the CCCFPD Ordinance, which would include design standards and management regulations, such as weed abatement and brush clearance regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. Furthermore, General Plan Measure 7-au, as discussed above, would allow fire protection agencies to review the proposed project and submit conditions of approval for consideration to determine whether the proposed structures are built in compliance with the standards of the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Fire Code, other State regulations, and local ordinances regarding the use of fire-retardant materials and detection, warning and extinguishment devices. With compliance to these aforementioned standards and regulations, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact in relation to the exposure of project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of wildfire. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? (Less than Significant) The proposed project would include the development of a new private road which would provide access to the project site from Grayson Road. As previously discussed, this new road would be approximately 28 feet wide with an 8-foot parking lane on one side and a 5-foot sidewalk along the northwest side and would comply with CCCFPD standards. Electric and natural gas utilities would be provided by PG&E and new connections to the project site would be undergrounded, minimizing potential impacts to fire risk. In addition, the proposed project would follow standards and regulations published in the CCCFPD Ordinance Code, California Fire Code, CBC, and County General Plan, as discussed above. This would remove the need for the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or result in impacts to the environment. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? (Less than Significant) The General Plan identifies the project site as being in an area with slopes of less than 26 percent degrees. As noted above, the project site elevations range from approximately Elevation 165 feet in the northeast corner of the site up to approximately Elevation 187 feet along the northwest boundary, sloping toward the east and south. Grayson Creek, which runs through portions of the project site, is in FEMA Flood Zone A, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annual-chance flood event. However, the proposed project would utilize a bioretention basin with capacity beyond what is required, as well as the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road to treat flood waters such that the project site would not be subject to downslope or downstream flooding. In addition, according to the Geologic Peer Review, the nearest landslide that has occurred near the project side is approximately 500 feet south of the project site, and another landslide is mapped 600 feet south of the project site. Because of the distance of the site from mapped landslides, and the moderate slope gradients on the site, the risk of landslides impacts the project site do not appear to present a potential hazard. Landslide risks would have a less than significant impact. Therefore, impacts related downslope flooding or landslides would be less than significant. Sources of Information • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). 2018. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA Map. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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 individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? SUMMARY: a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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? As discussed in individual sections of this Initial Study, the project proposes to create ten lots on the existing two-parcel on the project site and to construction 10 (eight net) new single family homes. Thus, the project may impact the quality of the environment (Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources) but the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level with the adoption of the recommended Mitigation Measures that are specified in the respective sections of this Initial Study. The project is not expected to threaten any wildlife population, impact endangered plants or animals, or affect state cultural resources with the already identified Mitigation Measures. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) The proposed project would not create substantial cumulative impacts. The project site is located within the Urban Limit Line in an area that has been designated for single- family residential development. The proposed project would be consistent with the existing surrounding single-family residential development. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? This Initial Study has disclosed impacts that would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures. All identified Mitigation Measures would be included in the conditions of approval for the proposed project, and the applicant would be responsible for implementation of the measures. As a result, there would not be any environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. REFERENCES References used in the process of preparing the Initial Study Checklist and conduction of the evaluation are available for review at the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Rd., Martinez, CA 94553. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. MMRP Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:4,514 Notes0.10.07 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Vicinity Map City Limits Unincorporated Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Maintained Roads Water Bodies County Boundary Bay Area Counties Assessment Parcels 103 105 106 109 110107 111 113 123 104 124 153 125 126 128 129 127 133 132 131 151 150 152 156 158 164 165 166 147 148 149 146 145 143 144 141 142 140 139 136 135114115 116 130 175 176 177 178 180 184 187 188 193194 195 174 168 169 170 167 171 171B 108 112 131 G R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SFLOT8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF TOTAL UNITS: 10 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SUMMARY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT EASTON C. MCALLISTER, PE DATE UTILITIES: AT&T PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CITY OF PLEASANT HILL CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT COMCAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FPD CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT CABLE TELEVISION: TELEPHONE: SEWAGE DISPOSAL: FIRE PROTECTION: WATER SUPPLY: GAS & ELECTRIC: STORM DRAIN: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-15EXISTING ZONING: CIVIL ENGINEER: PROPOSED LAND USE: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: TOTAL AREA: SUBDIVIDER: SURVEYOR: 3.05± AC GROSS (2.76± AC NET) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO:166-030-001 & 002 PROPERTY ADDRESS: P.E. #61148 EXP 12/31/20 ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES 925-683-5493 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD DANVILLE, CA 94526 (925) 837-3780 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD DANVILLE, CA 94526 (925) 837-3780 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD PLEASANT HILL, CA 94523 CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK ON THIS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD CIVIL ENGINEERING PRACTICE. VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 01/28/22 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD CITY OF PLEASANT HILL, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FLOOD ZONE VICINITY MAP N.T.S. THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE DERIVED FROM SURFACE OBSERVATION AND ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. ACTUAL LOCATION AND SIZE, TOGETHER WITH PRESENCE OF ANY ADDITIONAL UTILITY LINES NOT SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. BLDG CONC (E)/EX ESMT FNC INV. P.U.E REBAR. () R/W SSCO SSMH SDDI (T) WM WV BUILDING CONCRETE EXISTING EASEMENT FENCE INVERT PRIVATE UTILITY EASEMENT REBAR RECORD DATA RIGHT OF WAY SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STORM DRAIN DRAIN INLET TOTAL WATER METER WATER VALVE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WATER VALVE FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED STANDARD STREET MONUMENT EASEMENT LINE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY LINE TIE LINE CENTERLINE EXISTING WATER LINE EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPE EXISTING ELECTRIC CABLE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING UTILITY NOTE: ZONE A: SPECIAL FLOOD AREA WITHOUT BASE FLOOD. ELEVATION (BFE) ZONE X: AREAS OF 0.2% CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS PROTECTED BY LEVEES FROM 1% CHANCE FLOOD. FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PANEL NUMBER 06013C0280G, DATED 03/21/2017. LEGEND: No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP DESCRIPTIONNUMBER SHEET INDEX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRIANAGE AND UTILITY PLAN HYDROLOGY AND STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN CREEK STRUCTURE SETBACK EXHIBIT TREE INVENTORY SHEET TREE INVENTORY SHEET CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LAYOUT PROPERTY OWNER:ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES 925-683-5493 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 *BUILDING SETBACKS MINIMUM SIDE YARD WIDTH SHALL BE 5' MINIMUM, 10' AGGREGATE FOR LOTS 51 FEET OR LESS IN WIDTH; 5' MINIMUM, 15' AGGREGATE FOR LOTS BETWEEN 51' AND 80' WIDTH. (COUNTY ORDINANCE SECTION 82-14.004) FRONT SETBACK:14' TO LIVING AREA 20' TO GARAGE 101 102 1 154 155 157 160 159 161 162 163 137 138 117 118 119 122 120 121 179 181 182 185 183 186 189 190 191 192 172 173 198 199 197 196 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 192A 173B 142B 138B 135A 122A G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 PAD 181.0 PAD 170.0 PAD 170.0 PAD 170.5 PAD 173.5 PAD 173.5PAD 176.5PAD 178.0 PAD 181.0 PAD 184.0 BIO 163.30 ACCESS DRIVE TYPICAL SECTION SCALE: 1"=5' A - 42' MINIMUM ESMT P/L 10' TRAVEL 8' PARKING 9.5'NEIGHBOR20' WIDE FIRE LANE 10' TRAVEL ESMT 4.5' GRAYSON ROAD FRONTAGE SCALE: 1"=5' B -PROJECTGRAYSON ROADP/L 21'± EP No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 20' VTM-2 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN PRELIMINARY GRADING, *TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE: TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SITE INLETS (EXCLUDES C.3 TREATMENT POND OUTLET STRUCTURE. G R A Y S O N R O A D No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-3 WATER CONTROL PLAN HYDROLOGY AND STORM C.3 FLOW-THROUGH PLANTER - 1 NATIVE SOIL COMPACTED @ 85% MIN R.C. 24"x24" STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN 12" DRAIN ROCK LAYER 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40 PERF PIPE; FACE PERFORATIONS DOWNWARD. 6" MIN 18" LOAMY SAND PER CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK APPENDIX B. NO LINER 3:1 MAX. RIDGE ELEV. OUT 2" MIN 40ml HDPE POND LINER OR APPROVED EQUAL FINISH GRADE GRATE ELEV. BASE ELEV. CLASS II PERMEABLE, CALTRANS SPEC. 68-1.025 LANDSCAPE PLANTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK APPENDIX B. NOTE: REFER TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK CHAPTER 4 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERS. C.3 TREATMENT SIZING CALCULATIONS DETENTION SIZING CALCULATIONS GGFFE E D D C C B B AAG R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460 ±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SF LOT 8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF TOEOFCREEKBANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK81.49CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK94.03CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.41CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.80CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK91.30CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-4 SETBACK EXHIBIT CREEK STRUCTURE No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 N.T.S. VTM-5 TREE INVENTORY ARBORIST REPORT No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 N.T.S. VTM-6 TREE INVENTORY ARBORIST REPORT G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 PLAN 1 LOT 2 PLAN 3 LOT 3 PLAN 3 LOT 4 PLAN 2 LOT 5 PLAN 1LOT 6 PLAN 3 LOT 7 PLAN 3 LOT 8 PLAN 3 LOT 9 PLAN 2 LOT 10 PLAN 3 1" = 20' VTM-7 BUILDING LAYOUT CONCEPTUAL No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 Date: Job No.: By: Scale: 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COM 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 03/25/22 EM 19300 * *-Affordable unit for Moderate Income Household Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde, (Applicant / Owner) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program County File #CDSD20-09531 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 March 2023 Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 2 of 14 SECTION 1: AESTHETICS Potential Impact: The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light -sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. Project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties and Grayson Creek Mitigation Measures: Aesthetics 1: Thirty days prior to application for a building permit for subdivision improvements, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: At least 30 days prior to applying for building permits for the new residence. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project Proponent and CDD Staff. Compliance Verification: Review and approval of construction drawings (e.g., site plan, floor plans, elevations and grading plans) by Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) staff, to verify compliance with all mitigations and conditions of approval. SECTION 2: AIR QUALITY Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures: Air Quality 1: The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 3 of 14 All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxi cs control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Implementing Action: COA Timing Verification: Prior to CDD issuance of a grading or building permit, all construction plan sets shall include Basic Construction measures. Responsible Department or Agency: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD Plan Check review of plans prior to issuance of building or grading permit, and field verification by the Building Inspection Division. Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities using diesel powered vehicles and equipment on the site could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by creating localized odors. Mitigation Measures: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures outlined in Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. SECTION 3: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: suitable habitat for special-status plants, grading activities within suitable habitat could result in direct impacts to special-status plants through habitat loss or degradation. Mitigation Measures: Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 4 of 14 Biology 1: In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to submittal of building permits and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-skinned hawk, and destrel) were present, and observed foraging on the project site. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed on the project site exhibiting nesting behaviors. Mitigation Measures: Biology 2: All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out -of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 5 of 14 protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Biology 3: If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: . CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF) in the 5-mile radius of the project site. Additionally, during the April 2021 survey, the Project Biologist identified suitable habitat for the CRLF Mitigation Measures: Biology 4: A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. Biology 5: Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre- Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 6 of 14 construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red -legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and wor k areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Five occurrences of western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) within the 5-mile radius of the project site. Water was present in Grayson Creek during the April 2021 survey. Therefore, western pond turtle could use the creek for foraging and aquatic dispersal. Mitigation Measures: Biology 4 and Biology 5 Potential Impact: Runoff from the project site could adversely affect aquatic life within the adjacent water features. Mitigation Measures: Biology 6: A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 7 of 14 Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Removal of trees would impact raptor foraging and nesting bird habitat Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 7 Biology 7: Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan and landscaping plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Mammals, such as the western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) could use large trees and existing residential buildings for roosting opportunities and foraging habitat within the site. Implementation of the project would result in the demolition of the existing residences along with 40 trees. Tree removal partnered with any project- related construction lighting would result in the disturbance of roosting bats and the loss of roosting and foraging bat habitat. Mitigation Measures: Biology 8: For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special -status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: • To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 8 of 14 work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. • Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. • If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artif,icial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Project implementation would result in removal of approximately 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland, which is considered a sensitive natural community and is an oak woodland protected under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 6, Biology 7 and Biology 9 Biology 9: During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially: Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 9 of 14 b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. Potential Impact: The proposed project plans on the removal of approximately 97 trees including native species such as coast live oak, valley oak, black walnut, and buckeye. Native trees and all trees greater than 6.5 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) are considered to be protected under the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. Mitigation Measures: Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 9. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. SECTION 4: CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5. Subsurface construction activities have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. Historic resources can include wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 10 of 14 Mitigation Measures: Cultural Resources 1: All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. Cultural Resources 2: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: 1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Implementing Action: COA Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 11 of 14 Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: Include on plan sets during plan check and submittal of archaeologist report in the event of a find, for CDD review. SECTION 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potential Impact: The project could significantly impact the potential for increased exposure to adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Mitigation Measures: Geology 1: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project geologist, peer review geologist, and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD and peer review geologist review of investigation report by project geologist. Potential Impact: There is a possibility that previously undiscovered buried fossils and other paleontological resources could be present and accidental discovery could occur. Geology 2: The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 12 of 14 deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Project proponent and CDD. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: CDD. Compliance Verification: Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map. Potential Impact: The project could be located on located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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 Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures Geology 1 would reduce the impacts of unstable soil to a less than significant level. Section 13 NOISE Potential Impact: Construction related noise could impact adjacent sensitive receptors. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 13 of 14 Noise 1: To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: • The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. • At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. • The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. • The construction contractor shall limit noise producing construction activities to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturday. No such activities shall be permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Project proponent and CDD. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: CDD. Compliance Verification: Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map. SECTION 18: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of mitigations measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 14 of 14 landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of mitigations measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. SECTION 10: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potential Impact: As discussed in individual sections of the Initial Study, the project to create two parcels from the site may impact the quality of the environment (Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources). Mitigation Measures: The impact would be reduced to a less than significant level with the adoption of the recommended Mitigation Measures that are specified in the respective sections of the Initial Study. Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (Revised) Chambers, Andrew@Wildlife <Andrew.Chambers@Wildlife.ca.gov> Mon 3/27/2023 8:23 AM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> 2 attachments (2 MB) CEQA Notice CDSD20-09531 03242023 - signed.pdf; Grayson Rd 10-Lot Subdivision Project-SCH2022050245-Lawlor-CHAMBERS052722.pdf; Good morning Joseph, CDFW previously commented on the proposed mitigated negative declaration for this project. CDFW is requesting that our original comment letter be included as attached, and that all components therein be addressed and met as conditions of approval for the project by the County. Thank you, -Andy Andrew O. Chambers Environmental Scientist Bay Delta Region, Habitat Conservation Unit 2825 Cordelia Road, Suite 100 Fairfield, CA 94534 Cell - (707) 266-2878 From: Wildlife Ask BDR <AskBDR@wildlife.ca.gov> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 11:40 AM To: Chambers, Andrew@Wildlife <Andrew.Chambers@Wildlife.ca.gov> Subject: FW: Noce of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Migated Negave Declaraon (Revised) From: Anne Nounou <Anne.Nounou@dcd.cccounty.us> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 8:56 AM To: Bret Wickham <Bret.Wickham@dcd.cccounty.us>; Darwin Myers <dmyersassoc@gmail.com>; Gabriel Lemus <Gabriel.Lemus@dcd.cccounty.us>; Nestor Baligod <Nestor.Baligod@dcd.cccounty.us>; John Cunningham <John.Cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us>; Robert Sarmiento <Robert.Sarmiento@dcd.cccounty.us>; Simone Saleh <Simone.Saleh@pw.cccounty.us>; Larry Gosse <larry.gosse@pw.cccounty.us>; Jocelyn LaRocque <jocelyn.larocque@pw.cccounty.us>; Kellen O'Connor <Kellen.O'Connor@pw.cccounty.us>; Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control (jshannon@contracostamosquito.com) <jshannon@contracostamosquito.com>; Russ Leavi <rleavi@centralsan.org>; Fire <fire@cccfpd.org>; Northwest Informaon Center <nwic@sonoma.edu>; Troy Fujimoto <ujimoto@pleasanthillca.org>; hcroffoot@pleasanthillca.org; Catherine Windham <Catherine.windham@pw.cccounty.us>; Jorge Hernandez <jhern@pw.cccounty.us>; cpd@wiltonrancheria-nsn.gov; rhatch@wiltonrancheria- nsn.gov; esilva@wiltonrancheria-nsn.gov; Wildlife Ask BDR <AskBDR@wildlife.ca.gov>; Baaglia, Michelle@Wildlife <Michelle.Baaglia@wildlife.ca.gov>; McGregor, Jennifer <jennifer.mcgregor@ebmud.com>; Planning.review <planning.review@ebmud.com>; david.rehnstrom@ebmud.com; Joson, Loriezel <ljoson@ebmud.com>; chien.wang@ebmud.com Cc: Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Subject: Noce of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Migated Negave Declaraon (Revised) WARNING: This message is from an external source. Verify the sender and exercise cauon when clicking links or opening aachments. FILE NO CDSD20-09531 Noce is aached. Anne Nounou Department of Conservaon and Development Contra Costa County 925-655-2861 State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Bay Delta Region 2825 Cordelia Road, Suite 100 Fairfield, CA 94534 (707) 428-2002 www.wildlife.ca.gov Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870 May 27, 2022 Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr., Project Planner Contra Costa County Community Development Division 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us Subject: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, County File CDSD20-09531, SCH No. 2022050245, Contra Costa County Dear Mr. Lawlor: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received Notice of Intent to Adopt an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) from Contra Costa County (County) for the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project (Project) pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CDFW is submitting comments on the IS/MND to inform the County, as the Lead Agency, of our concerns regarding potentially significant impacts to sensitive resources associated with the Project. CDFW ROLE CDFW is a Trustee Agency with responsibility under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15386 for commenting on projects that could impact fish, plant, and wildlife resources. CDFW is also considered a Responsible Agency if a project would require discretionary approval, such as a California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Permit, a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement, or other provisions of the Fish and Game Code that afford protection to the State’s fish and wildlife trust resources. PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY Applicant: Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde, 1908 Cambridge Place, Walnut Creek, California 94598 Objective: The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre Project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet (ft2). On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single- family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 ft2, is expected to be DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Contra Costa County Community Development Division May 27, 2022 Page 2 of 8 constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the Project. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot-wide roadway and 4.5-foot-wide sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021 ft2 detention basin located at the northeast corner of the property. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. No direct stormwater discharge will be placed into Grayson Creek without previously being cleaned and metered through a compliant flowthrough treatment planter. A riparian setback between the Project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the Project. With implementation of the geotechnical engineering study recommendations, the Project could include more than 1,000 yd3 of grading. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 83 code-protected trees. An exception to Title 9 of the County Code would be required to allow for the alternative roadway improvements along Grayson Road (where curb, 5-foot-wide sidewalk, necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage are required). Finally, the Project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the Project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. Location: The proposed Project is located at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Walnut Creek, California 94598, within Contra Costa County. The Project is planned to occur on Accessor’s Parcel Numbers 166-030-001 and 166-030-002. The approximate center coordinate for the Project is 37.947520, -122.095145. Timeframe: No estimate on the Project’s commencement or completion has been provided. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING. The Project footprint comprises of an existing semi-developed 3.05-acre lot consisting of: intact mixed woodlands comprising of coast live and valley oaks, buckeye, other native or non-native trees, and their associated understory; the perennial mainstem of Grayson Creek and its associated riparian woodland corridor; non-native and native annual and perennial grasses, forbs, and shrubs; and two existing residential buildings. The Project site has had historic disturbance occur in relation to residential occupation and maintenance. Landscaping includes ornamental planting and fruit trees. The as-is site conditions provide potential foraging, roosting, and nesting habitat for local birds DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Contra Costa County Community Development Division May 27, 2022 Page 3 of 8 including, but not limited to, raptors and passerines, in addition to providing foraging and roosting habitat for bats. Existing vegetation assemblages and soils provide potential habitat for common native and special-status plants including Mt. Diablo fairy lantern (Calochortus pulchellus). On-site perennial freshwater stream resources provide potential dispersal and breeding habitat for reptiles including western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), amphibians including California reg-legged frog (Rana draytonii), and other common and/or special-status wildlife. The Project site is immediately surrounded by low density residential development which also contains mature oak woodlands. The Project site holds a habitat corridor to a larger section of oak woodland immediately to the southwest. Within 3 quarters of a mile to the west are public and privately owned areas comprising of designated open space, oak woodlands including Sensitive Natural Communities of Valley Oak Woodland and Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, and annual grasslands. These open space areas hold potential habitat and records of special-status species within reasonable dispersal distances including, but not limited to, Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), California red-legged frog, Mt. Diablo fairy lantern, and bent flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris). COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CDFW offers the below comments and recommendations to assist the County in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on fish, wildlife, and plant resources, including the habitats on which they depend. Special-Status Plants The IS/MND notes that 16 special-status plant species have been documented in the vicinity of the Project site. Four of which [bent-flowered fiddleneck, Diablo helianthella (Helianthella castanea), Mt. Diablo fairy lantern, and oval-leaved viburnum (Viburnum ellipticum)] have the potential to occur at the Project site and hold known records within a reasonable dispersal distance for propagules (California Native Plant Society (CNPS)- East Bay Chapter, 2018). The Biological Resources Analysis Report (BRAR) and IS/MND, states that only one (1) site visit was conducted for a floristic survey on April 6, 2021, resulting in no observations of special-status plants at the Project site. CDFW recommends that the Project area be surveyed for special-status plants by a qualified botanist following the “Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities,” which can be found online at https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols#377281280-plants (Protocol). This Protocol includes the identification of reference populations and adjacent potential habitat areas to assist in the accuracy and timing of Project site floristic surveys. For example, utilizing adjacent populations of oval-leaved viburnum (East Bay Regional Park District, 2017), a CNPS 2B.3 rare plant with the potential to DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Contra Costa County Community Development Division May 27, 2022 Page 4 of 8 occur at the Project site that blooms May through June, to best time surveying for this rare plant on the Project site. A qualified botanist should have an applicable educational background in botany and, at the minimum, have two field seasons experience identifying and observing each special-status plant with the potential to occur at the Project site including, but not limited to, the species referenced in this letter. In the absence of protocol-level surveys being performed, additional surveys may be necessary. Annual weather variations may require the necessity for additional floristic surveys to be performed. The results of surveys following the Protocol should be summarized into Botanical Survey Reports, as found on Page 9 of the Protocol, and be disclosed to the public through the appropriate CEQA disclosure procedures in a revised and recirculated IS/MND. If State listed plants, special-status plants, State rare plants found on the CNPS California Rare Plant Ranking system, or plants found on the CNPS East Bay Chapter’s Database of Rare and Unusual Plants are identified during botanical surveys, consultation with CDFW is warranted to determine if the Project can avoid take. In the absence of botanical surveys being performed in accordance with the Protocol, presence of said species should be assumed and mitigated for accordingly. Impacts for CESA-listed plant species should be fully avoided or addressed through application for, and issuance of, an Incidental Take Permit (ITP). Impacts to special-status plant species not listed under CESA should be mitigated for either by individual or acreage, depending on the species. CDFW recommends all future mitigation measures be summarized and disclosed to the public through the appropriate CEQA disclosure procedures in a revised and recirculated IS/MND. Tree Removal Sensitive Natural Communities The IS/MND, supported by the included Revised Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020, and authored by Traverso Tree Service, indicates that 83 trees, 6.5 inches or greater in diameter at breast height (DBH), from an on-site upland woodland will be removed as a result of the Project. Of the trees slated for removal, 32 are coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia), 20 valley oaks (Quercus lobata), and the remaining 31 being an assemblage of native, native yet not local, and non-native trees. Many of these trees are described as multi trunk and/or hold features displaying growth habit associated with individuals aged over 50 years. An analysis of oak natural communities was not provided, and the Revised Arborist Report did not include an assessment of canopy cover and absolute percentages in upland areas or covering the channel of Grayson Creek. The IS/MND fails to note that this collection of oaks may be identified as Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, based on these initial findings; both of which are Sensitive Natural Communities ranked as State Rank 3 and 4 respectively according to CDFW’s Natural Communities List (available at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural- Communities#sensitive%20natural%20communities). The IS/MND indicates within DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Contra Costa County Community Development Division May 27, 2022 Page 5 of 8 Mitigation Measure Biology-8 (MM B-8) that a 3:1 (mitigation: loss) ratio will be sought to mitigate for the loss of native trees caused by Project activities. However, MM B-8 does not include a replanting regime associated with the monitoring component. The proposed ratio and lack of success criteria and monitoring period are inadequate for mitigating the Project-related impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities to a level of less than significant. CDFW recommends that the IS/MND evaluate impacts to native tree species with a DBH of greater than 3 inches in the Project area that would be removed as part of the Project activities. Due to the cumulative impacts and increasing rarity of Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest in proximity to the Project area (i.e., remaining percentage of the communities within the County compared against their historic range within) and the State, the slow-growth habit and pattern of both of these natural communities, CDFW recommends mitigating for the loss of Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, at a 10:1 (mitigation: loss) ratio for both trees removed by quantity, and understory removed by area. This 10:1 ratio should include container plantings, replanting salvage vegetation, and hydroseeding with Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, focal species on-site at the point of disturbance in addition to a CDFW approved off-site mitigation component. Trees should be replaced at a level that will offset: 1) the lost biomass and canopy of the removed trees, and 2) the substantial temporal loss of growth habitat structure and diversity. Trees planted need to be spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits, and that serves to replicate or enhance the state of which was disturbed. As an alternative to container planting, the Project proponent may elect to protect, enhance, and preserve an area of mature oak woodland of equal or greater habitat value under a conservation easement in accordance with the mitigation ratio described above. The Project proponent should prepare a Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP) outlining success criteria and benchmarks aligned to meet the 10:1 (mitigation: loss) ratio goal at the end of 10 years after initial mitigation ef forts begin. CDFW recommends recirculating an updated IS/MND after performing a detailed analysis of such impacts to trees, Sensitive Natural Communities, and including appropriate mitigation measures to reduce the impacts of the Project to a level of less- than-significant. Nesting Birds The IS/MND indicates in Mitigation Measure Biology-1 that nesting bird surveys would be limited to the large trees of the adjacent riparian area from February 15 to August 31. This measure fails to avoid ground nesting birds and those that nest in shrubs. CDFW recommends the following mitigation measure be incorporated into a revised and recirculated IS/MND: a qualified biologist will survey for non-raptors within and beyond the Project area for a radius of 250 feet, and for raptors within and beyond the Project area for a radius of 1,000 feet; nesting surveys will occur from February 15 through DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Contra Costa County Community Development Division May 27, 2022 Page 6 of 8 September 15 and within 5 days prior to the expected commencement of Project activities; surveys will be repeated in areas where Project activities lapse for a period of 7 days or more; any active nests will have an appropriately sized protective buffer determined and established by a qualified biologist where no Project personnel or equipment shall be allowed to enter; that any active nest be continuously monitored by a qualified biologist; and that active nest buffers will increase if any change in bird behavior is detected as determined by a qualified biologist. Roosting Special-Status Bats CDFW recommends the following language replace Mitigation Measure Biology-4 to mitigate for the permanent impacts to special-status bats and their habitats to a level of less-than-significant: 1. Special-Status Bats (Bats). For all Project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of Project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special-status bat species are detected prior to the start of Project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all Project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special- status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: 1.1. To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. 1.2. Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Contra Costa County Community Development Division May 27, 2022 Page 7 of 8 when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. 1.3. If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artificial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure (found at: https://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents2020/cpt-ma-bats-transportion- structures-management-2018-04.pdf). REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement CDFW requires an LSA Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 1600 et. seq., for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank including associated riparian or wetland resources; or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Work within ephemeral streams, washes, watercourses with a subsurface flow, and floodplains are subject to notification requirements. Based on the Vesting Tentative Map for the Project, dated January 28, 2022, and authored by DeBolt Civil Engineering, an LSA Notification under Fish and Game Code section 1600 et. seq. would be a requirement of the Project as designed. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. [Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e)]. Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNNDB field survey form, online field survey form, and contact information for CNDDB staff can be found at the following link: https://wildlife.ca.gov/data/CNDDB/submitting-data. FILING FEES The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessmen t of filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Mr. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Contra Costa County Community Development Division May 27, 2022 Page 8 of 8 by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish and Game Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089). CONCLUSION To ensure significant impacts are adequately mitigated to a level less -than-significant, the feasible mitigation measures described above should be incorporated as enforceable conditions into the final CEQA document for the Project. CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the IS/MND to assist the County in identifying and mitigating Project impacts on biological resources. Questions regarding this letter or further coordination should be directed to Andrew Chambers, Environmental Scientist, at (707) 266-2878 or Andrew.Chambers@wildlife.ca.gov; or Michelle Battaglia, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisory), at (707) 339-6052 or Michelle.Battaglia@wildlife.ca.gov. Sincerely, Erin Chappell Regional Manager Bay Delta Region cc: State Clearinghouse REFERENCES East Bay Regional Park District (2017). Diablo Helianthella [ds45]. Mt. Diablo fairy lantern [ds45]. Calif. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Retrieved April 26, 2022, from https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS. CNPS East Bay (2018). Bent-flowered fiddleneck [ds45]. Oval-leaved viburnum [ds45]. Calif. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Retrieved May 2, 2022, from https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS. DocuSign Envelope ID: C62D2913-B83D-4D67-B0A7-13E415C558EB Grayson Road Development Hello Mr Lawlor, I am writing about the Grayson Road 10-lot subdivision, county file #CDSD20-09531. I am very concerned about the development and the impacts upon myself and many of my neighbors. We were expecting a full 30 day review period and we have been given only 20 days. Further we see many of the links in the attachments section are not live links, making it impossible for us to review the available information. We would like a full 30 day review period once the attachments are fixed and all information is available. Further we would like to be notified whence the 30 day begins anew. 1 Aesthics b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a state scenic highway? (No Impact) The Scenic Routes Map (Figure 5-4) of the County General Plan’s Transportation and Circulation Element identifies scenic routes in the County, including both State Scenic Highways and County designated Scenic Routes. No scenic routes are located in the project vicinity. The site is surrounded by predominantly single-family residential development. The project is not located near any designated scenic highway and would not damage any scenic resources related to a scenic highway. The project would not impact trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings considered to be significant scenic resources. Thus, no impact is expected on these resources. Comment: The plan calls for the removal of 83 (mature) trees. In other words the area will striped of vegetation. By definition that qualifies as substantial damage of scenic resources. Looking at a bunch of houses is in no way an improvement of the scenic beauty. c) would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? The project is located in an urbanized area as designated by the U.S. Census Bureau Urban Area Reference Maps. The visual character of the site would change with the eventual development of the proposed 10 lots. However, the applicant would be required to submit a landscape plan prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Additionally, the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan designation of Single- Family Residential – Low Density and the surrounding residential neighborhood. Though the project would include waivers from development standards for the R-15 zoning district, the residential project would be consistent with other residential development in the area, and thus the impact to the visual character of the area is expected to be less than significant. Comment: By definition the area is not in an urban area. North of Grayson Rd is part of the Pleasant Hill urban area. South of Grayson Rd Contra Costa Country, making it suburban. The plan is not consistent with existing development on the south of Grayson Rd. On the south of Grayson Rd in the immediate area there are not any houses on micro lots and there aren’t any 3500 square feet homes on micro lots. The housing density is ridiculous. Further I do not see any mention of noise remmediation. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Minimal glare would be introduced in the area. The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light-sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. The new sources of light associated with the proposed new 10 homes would illuminate the surrounding properties and Grayson Creek; thus, the project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light. Consequently, the applicant is required to implement the following mitigation measures to reduce impacts on nighttime views. Comment: I am very concerned about the light leakage across and into the riparian corridor. It is sure to be problematic for the existing residents along southern side of the riparian corridor. It will be for me! To help prevent light leakage please limit the height and lumens of any lighting on the streets or on the residents homes. Additionally, lighting the riparian corridor will be not only offending all the animals that move through the riparian corridor it would also particularly troublesome to me personally, as well as many of my neighbors. I do not want that light blasting over to my house all night, every night. It will invade my sleep!. I am sure other existing residents feel the same. Further I would like to ask that no plan is made on lighting the riparian corridor. Please prohibit the residents and the community from lighting riparian anywhere near the riparian area setback. I propose external lighting on riparian corridor side of the homes. Aesthetics 1: Thirty days prior to application for a building permit for subdivision improvements, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: 1. All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. 2. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact on nighttime views to a less than significant level. Comment: I have never heard of lights pointing upward or even outward. The suggestion that downward facing lights will mitigate light noise is nonsense. I would like to see a maximum light post height hopefully 15 feet or less and a maximum lumens brightness, lets say 60 watt equivalent. Further we want all lights restricted to the roadway and nothing on the riparian corridor side of the homes, for residents and the community. Lights on the riparian corridor will be very disturbing to the wildlife as well as to the residents on the opposite side of the riparian corridor. Further there is no mention of who will assume the responsibility for the lighting and assuring its functionality. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? As detailed in the Biological Resources Report prepared for the project, riparian habitat occurs along the Grayson Creek corridor along the southern boundary of the project site. Specifically, a riparian woodland corridor of approximately 1.5 acres occurs along Grayson Creek, a perennial creek, located in the southern portion of the project site . Riparian woodland is considered to be one of the most valuable wildlife habitats of temperate climates. The mixture of oaks, bays, and buckeyes along with the dense cover of shrubby under story vegetation provide wildlife with many different food sources, nesting opportunities and cover from predators. Within the riparian woodland area, no trees are proposed to be removed. To ensure the protection of the riparian woodland area and reduce the impacts of the project , Mitigation measure Biology 6 would be implemented, as described below. Biology 6 A permanent riparian setback shall be designated as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map as the Limit of Riparian Area (and further shown as Figure 11 of Biological Resources Report) as shown on the project site plan ( Sheet 1). A permanent wildlife -friendly fence shall be constructed along the setback line to limit encroachment into the area. The riparian setback shall be protected via a permanent deed restriction that is recorded against the title of the property and that shall run with the title of land in perpetuity (subject to any pre-existing publicly owned easements). The deed restriction shall be recorded on the Final Map and shall include written documentation specifying allowed and prohibited uses within the setback. Any activities allowed within the setback shall inure to the benefit of the preserved creek and riparian corridor. No development of any kind, including roads or grading, shall be allowed in the deed restricted area. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce impacts to trees to a level considered less than significant. With implementation of the mitigation measures Biology 6, the Project is not expected to have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Comment: I have concerns about "wildlife safe fencing". I have the sneaking feeling that the intention is to tightly fence off the riparian corridor completely preventing wildlife from entering or exiting the corridor. That would be nothing less than obscene!. At best that is harmful for the wildlife. Nothing about that is acceptable. Please define what a wildlife save fence is and describe how it serves the wildlife. Also we see the intended removal of 83 (mature) trees and little or no plan for replacing them. Nor, for that matter, any kind of replanting success plan. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Grayson Creek is a perennial creek that flows along the southern boundary of the project site from west to east through an oak woodland riparian corridor and is a jurisdictional water potentially regulated under the authority of the Army Corps of Engineers, RWQCB, and CDFW. The project is not proposing any structures or grading within Grayson Creek or its riparian corridor and will implement all County ordinances that require a setback from Grayson Creek to prevent the fill of waters or impacts to Grayson Creek or to its bed or bank. All structures will also be outside of the canopy dripline of trees at or below top of bank, and all grading shall occur outside of the limits of the riparian area. (See Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Sheet VTM-1; see also Olberding Biological Resources Analysis Report, dated February 2022, Figure 11). As such, no waters of the U.S. or State regulated resources would be impacted by the proposed project and authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or is not required. The proposed project will maintain both a creek structure setback and a permanent riparian setback (as discussed in Biology 6) between the proposed project footprint and Grayson Creek and will ensure that future property owners do not encroach into the creek-structure setback area by relinquishing development rights within the creek setback area as provided on the Vesting Tentative Map, and which shall be identified on the Final Map. The creek-structure setback will be protected via dedication of development rights on the Final Map and thus will be of record on the title of each lot in perpetuity. No development of any kind would be allowed in deed restricted area. The project does propose to remove 83 trees, however none of those tree are within the riparian corridor. No wetlands, marshes or vernal pools exist within the development are of site; therefore no substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act would occur by the establishment of the proposed project. Biology 7: Grayson Creek shall be permanently protected from site development by the establishment of the Creek Structure setback (as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map). The Creek Structure setback shall be protected via a permanent deed restriction and dedication of development rights to the County and shall be recorded against the title of the property and shall run with the title of land in perpetuity. With implementation of the mitigation measure Biology 6 and Biology 7, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS. Comment: I am very upset about the idea of removing 83 (mature) trees and replacing the trees with approximately 30 trees with plantings not to exceed 5 gallon size, basically saplings!. This is horrible! It basically means the project will be barren for years, decades really until the trees begin to mature. I would prefer to see a ratio more like 2.25:1 and would much rather see 25, or more, to be 25 gallon or greater and at least 5 of those 50 gallon or greater. Even those numbers sound small to me. Bigger is better! More is better! The tree will help mitigate the noise and the light and will be better for returning and transient wildlife. There is also no mention of who assumes the responsibility of maintaining the trees and other greenery and what the definition of a successful planting is. (i.e., if the plant does within the first 6 months will they replace it?) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? Comment: I see a number of species with regularity. They are either passing through the riparian corridor, on either side, or entering into or exiting from the riparian corridor. Just to name a few species I see, or hear, regularly includes: bats, owls, hawks, humming birds, finches, chicadees, blue jays, black birds, crows, ducks, turkey vultures, quail, king snakes, ring neck snakes, gopher snakes, squirrels, various rodents, coyotes, deer, raccoon, possums, many other species as well. Some I am not able to identify and all kinds of insects. The insects are important because they are a prime food source for many of the animals in the project area, especially the bats and the birds. There have already been many trees, shrubs and other greenery that have been removed. This is quite destructive to the habitat not to mention the increased noise. Which raises the point, I have not any plan on noise mitigation, by the inhabitants or during construction. It is very concerning to me that development company has already completed a great deal of devegetation. I am not aware of any biologists being on sight for any of the work they have completed so far. Suggesting they are not following their own mitigation plans. They have already successfully destroyed, or substantially altered the habitat for many species presumably without involving the biologists they claim they will be consulting with. I also understand the work done so far has been without permits. 13. NOISE a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?(Less Than Significant Impact) Activities at the future 10-lot subdivision are not expected to expose persons to, or generate, noise levels in excess of the Community Noise Exposure Levels shown on Figure 11-6 of the General Plan Noise Element. Figure 11-6 shows that levels of 60 dB or less are normally acceptable and noise levels between 60 dB to 70 dB are conditionally acceptable in residential areas. Types and levels of noise generated from the residential uses associated with the future residence would be similar to noise levels from the existing residential developments in the area. Thus, project noise impacts to the existing surrounding land uses would be less than significant. Comment: I am concerned about not only the construction noise but also the increased noise of habitation and road noise from both Grayson Rd and Taylor Blvd. The work that has already happened has resulted in a substantial increase in road noise coming from both Grayson Rd and Taylor Blvd. I am expecting the road to increase substantially once the 83 trees have been removed. Further I am concerned of the habitation noise. The quiet nature of this neighborhood has already significantly been altered Overall Comments: I see little or no information about maintenance of the replanted trees. I see no mention of continuing care, and possibly inspection, of the water detention system. Nor do I see any mention of verifying the health of the riparian corridor after their destruction/construction is complete. I am unhappy about the housing density. There is no indication of housing with such high density in surrounding county area (i.e., south of Grayson Rd). I am also opposed to not building the required sidewalks. It is a potentially dangerous area and not having sidewalks is sure to be problematic. At one point the developer indicated that each property would contain an ADU. If this is true than we are expecting to see a study indicating traffic impact because that would potentially be 20 families. I find it rather upsetting that a development firm is allowed to proceed after already demonstrating an unwillingness or inability to follow the permitting and other laws. They have been told to stop grading, stop devegetation efforts and not sure what else. Is this really a company to do business with? They seem to be taking the stance that it is easier to pay the fees than to operate above board. RE: Neg Dec for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd. Pleasant Hill Clay Haberman <clay@johnsonlyman.com> Fri 5/6/2022 7:39 AM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Cc:'Clay Haberman' <j1ofarch@gmail.com> Joseph, Thank you so much for your response. I have a few more quesons to expand on your answers regarding public hearings: Your response states that your agency will determine if the project is ready to go to public hearing and the number of responses will factor into when it goes to public hearing. Does this mean that a public hearing is mandated and that only the date is dependent on the response? Will approval of the vesng tentave map be a part of that hearing? Does the density bonus status place a limit on the number of public hearings that the project can be subject to? How many public hearings are currently ancipated for this project? What are they? Thanks again for your help. Clay Haberman LEED® AP BD+C, Johnson Lyman Architects, LLP P.O. Box 5664 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925.930.9690 x118 clay@johnsonlyman.com Please note our new mailing address : P.O. Box 5664, Walnut Creek CA 94596 From: Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 4:56 PM To: Clay Haberman <clay@johnsonlyman.com> Cc: 'Clay Haberman' <j1ofarch@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Neg Dec for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd. Pleasant Hill Clay, Please see my answer s to yo ur questio ns belo w. General: 1. What future steps will involve public noficaon and comment? What is the ancipated schedule for review of subsequent steps in the project entlement and perming? Fo llo wing the co mment perio d fo r the MND, the Co unty will review the co mments and determine if the pro ject is ready to go befo re a public hear ing. For public hear ings, the County no tiies by mail all owner s within 300 feet o f a pro ject site. Prio r to any public hearing for the project, an additio nal no tice will go o ut. Depending o n the volume and extent o f co mments, the pro ject wo uld likely go to hearing in June o r July. 1. Is approval of the vesng tentave map included in this noficaon and review? A decision to approve or deny the vesting tentative map wo uld be the next step. Certiication o f the MND wo uld happen co ncurrently with approval o f the map. Riparian corridor: 1. Why are trees being removed in the riparian corridor. Trees near the creek are regularly home to Coopers Hawks, Red Tail Hawks, Turkey Vultures, song birds, woodpeckers, squirrels just to name a few. To the extent po ssible, the Co unty required all trees to be preserved. Due to the grading of the site and siting o f the roadways and structures and the requested density, trees are pro po sed to be removed. No tree removal would occur with the ripar ian wo o dland corrido r identiied along the creek. 1. What is allowed/not allowed beyond the creek structure setback line. Hardscape? Ornamental planng? Fencing? Mitigatio n Measure Biolo gy 6 speciies that any activities allowed within the setback shall inure to the beneit of the preserved creek and r iparian corrido r. No develo pment o f any kind, including ro ads or grading, shall be allo wed in the deed restr icted area. In response to yo ur examples, hardscape and fencing would no t be allowed since they are clearly development. Or namental planting wo uld no t be explicitly prohibited by the deed restriction. Density: 1. What limits are being placed on the size of homes constructed? Do the proposed development standards for this lot address lot coverage? FAR? What are the limitaons imposed by standard County planning guidelines and by the proposed adjusted guidelines? The height o f the ho mes wo uld be limited by the Co unty Code to 35' tall. The area wo uld be limited to the pro posed setbacks. Tho ugh the setbacks act as limitatio ns on lo t coverage, the Co unty does no t have lo t coverage o r FAR limits. Development Standards: 1. Concrete curb and guer exist on Grayson Road to the immediate East and West of the subject property. Is there something that precludes connuing this concrete curb and guer in front of the subject property? The applicant has requested a co ncession based o n the State's Density Bo nus L aw that wo uld provide a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge o f pavement o f Grayso n Ro ad, as well as bicycle lane striping in-lieu o f co mplete fro ntage improvements. Thank yo u for yo ur interest in the project. Please do n't hesitate to reach o ut if yo u have any additio nal questio ns. Regards, Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP Project Planner, Current Planning Section Community Development Division Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Phone: (925) 655-2872 From: Clay Haberman <clay@johnsonlyman.com> Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 4:00 PM To: Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Cc: 'Clay Haberman' <j1ofarch@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Neg Dec for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd. Pleasant Hill Dear Mr. Lawlor, I have reviewed the vesng tentave map and the proposed migated negave declaraon and I have a few more quesons as follows: General: 1. What future steps will involve public noficaon and comment? What is the ancipated schedule for review of subsequent steps in the project entlement and perming? 2. Is approval of the vesng tentave map included in this noficaon and review? Riparian corridor: 1. Why are trees being removed in the riparian corridor. Trees near the creek are regularly home to Coopers Hawks, Red Tail Hawks, Turkey Vultures, song birds, woodpeckers, squirrels just to name a few. 2. What is allowed/not allowed beyond the creek structure setback line. Hardscape? Ornamental planng? Fencing? Density: 1. What limits are being placed on the size of homes constructed? Do the proposed development standards for this lot address lot coverage? FAR? What are the limitaons imposed by standard County planning guidelines and by the proposed adjusted guidelines? Development Standards: 1. Concrete curb and guer exist on Grayson Road to the immediate East and West of the subject property. Is there something that precludes connuing this concrete curb and guer in front of the subject property? Thank you for your me in helping me to understand exactly what is being proposed here. The me period alloed from my receipt of the noficaon to the deadline for subming comments is unreasonably short. Any addional informaon is very helpful in assessing the proposed negave declaraon and the project. Sincerely, Clay Haberman 1010 Grayson Road Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 925-323-1440 From: Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 10:27 AM To: Clay Haberman <clay@johnsonlyman.com> Cc: 'Clay Haberman' <j1ofarch@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Neg Dec for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd. Pleasant Hill Clay, Thank yo u for yo ur interest in the proposed Grayso n Ro ad Subdivision project (Co unty File CDSD20-09531). I've provided responses to yo ur questio ns belo w. If you wo uld like, I would be happy to set up a time to review the pro ject with yo u. 1. Can you send me a link to a plan of the proposed subdivision? It is not possible to evaluate the accuracy of the negave declaraon without seeing the proposed plan. For example, the cumulave area of the 10 proposed lots equals the area of the exisng lots. No area has been alloed for the new road. So are the proposed setbacks from the property line, which is presumably in the middle of the street, or are they from the curb? Please ind the proposed Vesting Tentative Map attached. The propo sed right-o f-way is private and wo uld be an easement o n each of the pro perties within the subdivision. The setback wo uld be measured fro m the edge o f the easement. 1. If the proposed new road is located on the private lots, the effecve developable area of the lots is reduced to less than what is evident in the report itself. Was this taken into account in the preparaon of this report? The net develo pable area o f the pro per ty was used for the allowable density calculatio n. The net area excludes the area within the pr ivate r ight-of-way. 1. Without seeing a site plan it is impossible to evaluate whether there will be driveways on Grayson and whether they will have only a 15 front setback. The driveways would all be located on the propo sed private right-o f-way. 1. It appears that the applicant is seeking 5 waivers under California Density Bonus Law. My understanding is that the county is only required to grant 1 such concession for moderate income units comprising 10% of the project. Is this correct? Yes, you are correct that the o ne moderate inco me unit requires the County to grand o nly o ne co ncessio n o r incentive. The Density Bo nus law provides for regulato ry incentives or co ncessio ns that result in identiiable and actual co st reductions to provide fo r affo rdable housing co sts. The Density Bo nus applicatio n submitted to the Co unty has requested that the installatio n o f the co mplete frontage improvements be o mitted in lieu of a reconstr ucted asphalt-concrete curb along the edge o f pavement of Grayso n Road along the pro ject fro ntage as well as bicycle lane striping. In additio n to the o ne concessio n requested, the Density Bonus Law allows fo r waivers to develo pment standards that would o therwise preclude the pro ject. If any develo pment standard wo uld physically prevent the pro ject from being built at the per mitted density and with the granted co ncessio ns/incentives, the develo per may pro pose to have tho se standards waived o r reduced. The waiver or reduction o f a develo pment standard do es not count as an incentive o r co ncessio n, and there is no limit on the number of develo pment standard waivers that may be requested o r granted. 1. Due to the wording, it is not clear if the bike lane is being eliminated in the street frontage concession or is being installed. Please clarify. The bike lane in fro nt of the pro ject site would no t be eliminated. A reco nstr ucted asphalt- co ncrete curb along the edge o f pavement of Grayson Road along the pro ject frontage as well as bicycle lane striping is propo sed in lieu of sidewalk improvements. Sincerely, Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP Project Planner, Current Planning Section Community Development Division Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Phone: (925) 655-2872 From: Clay Haberman <clay@johnsonlyman.com> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2022 9:26 AM To: Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Cc: 'Clay Haberman' <j1ofarch@gmail.com> Subject: Neg Dec for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd. Pleasant Hill Dear Mr. Lawlor, I am a home owner adjacent to the subject property of the proposed negave declaraon, county file CDSD20- 09531. I received noce of intent to adopt the proposed migated negave declaraon. I have some quesons: 1. Can you send me a link to a plan of the proposed subdivision? It is not possible to evaluate the accuracy of the negave declaraon without seeing the proposed plan. For example, the cumulave area of the 10 proposed lots equals the area of the exisng lots. No area has been alloed for the new road. So are the proposed setbacks from the property line, which is presumably in the middle of the street, or are they from the curb? 2. If the proposed new road is located on the private lots, the effecve developable area of the lots is reduced to less than what is evident in the report itself. Was this taken into account in the preparaon of this report? 3. Without seeing a site plan it is impossible to evaluate whether there will be driveways on Grayson and whether they will have only a 15 front setback. 4. It appears that the applicant is seeking 5 waivers under California Density Bonus Law. My understanding is that the county is only required to grant 1 such concession for moderate income units comprising 10% of the project. Is this correct? 5. Due to the wording, it is not clear if the bike lane is being eliminated in the street frontage concession or is being installed. Please clarify. Thank you for your me and assistance. My neighbors and I look forward to seeing a site development plan. Clay Haberman LEED® AP BD+C, Johnson Lyman Architects, LLP P.O. Box 5664 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925.930.9690 x118 clay@johnsonlyman.com Please note our new mailing address : P.O. Box 5664, Walnut Creek CA 94596 May 11, 2022 Joseph Lawlor Jr., AICP Project Planner Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 855-323-2626 Joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us RE: Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt Proposed Negative Declaration 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA APN 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 County File CDSD20-09531 Dear Mr. Lawlor, I am writing in response to the notice of public review of the above referenced project. The notice is dated April 22 and I received it April 28. I have the reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“Initial Study”) prepared by County Staff, a proposed Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) by DeBolt Civil Engineers dated January 28, 2022, and a Biological Resources Study by Olberding Environmental dated February 2022. I received the VTM from Staff May 4 after requesting supporting documentation. I received the Biological Resources Report from a neighbor the following day. I have the following concerns: Timing: The notice of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was not received within 20 days of the required response date. Although the MND was found on the County CEQA website referenced in the notice, the supporting documents referenced in the MND were not. The notice states that “all documents referenced in the mitigated negative declaration may be reviewed on the Department of Conservation and Development webpage”. This appears to be in error as the Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) and the Biological Resources Analysis could not be found and were therefore not provided within the 20 day notification period. An extension of time should be granted. Additional Stake Holders: I have received correspondence from other neighbors indicating that the County does not intend to notify other state and local agencies who’s mandate is to ensure responsible stewardship of the natural environment, specifically local streams. Such agencies include California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Contra Costa Clean Water Program. Withholding information from these agencies as well as the lack of easily accessed information noted in the previous paragraph is not consistent with the Department of Conservation and Development’s published mandate of coordinating habitat conservation programs, encouraging public participation, providing both accurate and timely information through objective and thorough analyses, and collaborating with residents and other agencies. Finding reasons to exclude other affected agencies and failure to voluntarily produce all of the project documents serves the developer’s interests in disproportion to the interests of the surrounding citizens. CEQA trustee agencies should be notified immediately. Tree Removal: The removal of 83 “code protected” trees is disturbing, particularly near and contiguous with the riparian area as determined by Olberding. This is the antithesis of “protecting” the trees and natural habitat. Under County ordinance, by standard determination of the riparian area and structural setback lines, and by more sensitive grading design, many of the native trees near Grayson Creek can be saved. 1. The border of the riparian area is determined by the biologists and is a matter of professional opinion based on standard practice. It appears that a significant number of trees whose canopies are contiguous with tree canopies in the riparian area are to be removed. Though these trees are not in the determined riparian area, they are grouped with trees on the edge of the creek and therefore can be considered riparian vegetation, which is accepted standard practice in determining the edge of a riparian area. As such, by ordinance and as noted in the Biological Resources report, the agency may extend the structural setback line to include such areas. I urge the county to re-assess the Northern extent of the riparian area and the structural setback line. 2. Careful grading and better routing of site utilities can help preserve some of the native trees along the creek. Specifically, the storm drain pipe and retaining wall on Lot 3 can be moved to the West without reducing the size of the proposed home. This would allow the preservation of Oak trees 169, 169B, 170, 171, and 171B. Additional adjustments to grading and the structural setback can potentially save redwood tree number 135 as well as others. The overall proposed grading plan and tree removal plan should be reviewed by a qualified civil engineer and alternatives should be studied in the interest of preserving the natural habitat. 3. The County has cited the grading plan as justification for allowing trees to be removed in the riparian area and within the structural setback line. This is not true, as it is clear that with better design the project can be developed with less destruction of the natural environment and with proper application of the county tree removal ordinance staff can require the developer to study alternate means of accomplishing his/her goals. Mitigations: The trees along the creek are regularly home to raptors, birds, bats and wildlife as documented in the Biological Resources Analysis. Removal of this habitat endangers our local fauna. 1. Mitigation Measure number 2 (replace riparian associated trees that are removed from the property in 3:1 ratio) is not an adequate mitigation for trees in or adjacent to the riparian area. As noted above, the goal should be to preserve the trees in this sensitive zone. Other native trees on the site that are slated for demolition should be replaced with similar native species of 4ft box size minimum. 2. Mitigation Measure numbers 3, 4, 5, 6 (conduct avian, bat, reptile, and amphibian surveys prior construction) does nothing to protect the plant environment or maintain the habitat that attracts and houses protected and unprotected species of birds and animals. The sole purpose of this proposed mitigation is to keep construction activities from killing birds and animals rather than preserving and protecting the natural habitat in which they exist at various times throughout the year. Whether there is a nest at the time of construction is important, but should not be the only mitigation in preservation of the natural environment. Native trees contiguous with trees in the riparian area should be preserved. 3. In general the mitigation measures lack any performance standards specifying what is required if sensitive species are found on the site or in the trees. It simply states a survey is required to determine presence or absence. Mitigation measures need to include requirements for monitoring by a qualified biologist during construction to determine if birds, reptiles, amphibians, animals, etc are being disturbed. Buffer zones should be monitored and reevaluated regularly to ensure they are sufficient. The biologist should monitor the situation and prescribe further steps that must be taken to avoid impacts to wildlife, including the cessation of construction activities as necessary. Development Standards: Concrete curb and gutter exist on Grayson Road to the immediate East and West of the subject property. Staff has stated in emails that waivers can be granted as necessary to facilitate the construction of the bonus density moderate income unit. It is understandable that typical street frontage landscaping is not appropriate for this site due to existing native trees in the Right Of Way. However, at the very least, this project should have concrete curb and gutter, not asphalt. Concrete curb and gutter consistent with the standards existing along Grayson Road versus the proposed asphalt curb does not have any bearing on the viability of this project or the ability for the developer to provide the moderate income property. This waiver should not be granted. Asphalt should not be allowed. Noise and Project Information: Section 13 of the MND related to noise generated by the project does not adequately address construction activities. Many of us work from home and will be impacted by construction noise. 1. A construction noise plan for this project by a qualified acoustical engineer should be required and noise reducing measures put into place. Engines (vehicles as well as generators and compressors) should be properly muffled and not allowed to run constantly, loud music during construction should not be allowed and neighbors should be properly notified prior to loud activities. Temporary power from PG & E should be required during construction to eliminate the need for gas powered generators and compressors. This will also reduce the emission of green-house gases during construction. 2. Posting the phone number of the project contact person is helpful but is an inadequate and outdated condition of approval for a project like this. In addition to posting a contact number, the applicant should be required to establish and maintain a project website that has a project contact (point person), project plans that are updated with any revisions noted, and a regularly updated schedule of construction activity with milestones, progress, and delays. Via the website or other method of contact, the neighbors should be notified of major construction activities that might affect their daily lives, such as road closures or noisy activities. Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to the County’s response to my concerns as well as those of my fellow neighbors. Sincerely, Clay Haberman 1010 Grayson Road Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 (925) 323-1440 Clay@JohnsonLyman.com Grayson Rd. Subdivision Kirsten West <88keywest@gmail.com> Thu 5/5/2022 9:42 AM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us>;SupervisorMitchoff <SupervisorMitchoff@bos.cccounty.us> Dear Mr. Lawlor and Supervisor Mitchoff, As a resident of Pleasant Hill living on Mohawk Dr. I received your letter of April 22, 2022 informing us of the proposed subdivision to be built on the property directly behind my home. I am requesting that the deadline of May 12, 2022 be extended for sixty days from the date of April 22, 2022. The deadline of May 12 is not a sufficient amount of time to be able to study the proposal and determine if the environmental protections that the project designers state are actually possible or would be followed. There was much activity on this property in November and December of 2021 with many trees being cut down and saw dust dumped into the creek. Some of my neighbors spoke with the people working on the project and their attitude was not encouraging that any care would be taken to ensure the health of Grayson Creek. My husband called your office in November and spoke with you but at that time you said that you could not share any information about this project with him. This deadline of May 12, 2022 is not standard procedure to inform a neighborhood of a project of this size and nature and I request for an extension until June 21, 2022. Thank you for your time and consideration. Cordially, Kirsten West 2063 Mohawk Dr, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 5/6/22, 1:50 PM Mail - Joseph Lawlor - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/id/AAQkAGVmM2ZiODRiLTEwYzMtNDZiYi1iM2QxLTNiYWQ0YTdlNGJlZgAQAIy8YJf5w1FPjC9zraW9ZT0%3D 1/3 Grayson Road Lacey <lacedoxie@yahoo.com> Fri 4/29/2022 2:37 PM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> I was not notified of this until a neighbor showed me. Google Earth shows I am between 140-201 feet from where building is proposed. Please add me to all future mailings. 2052 Mohawk Drive. There is Inadequate time being allotted for comments. I believe the proposed Mitigated Neg Dec should be a full EIR. This property owner has been negligent of the law, and the Neg Dec report they submitted purposefully omits pertinent information. It is incorrigible that the County allowed this to follow the path of "Mitigated Neg Dec" based on their past blatant and repeated violation of laws and very lame attempts at "mitigating measures". As a reminder, this site did illegal grading: On August 30th, 2021: BIRG21-00698 Matthew Webster initiated a Code Enforcement Case regarding the non-permitted “importing of dirt onto the property without a permit.” Then they proceeded to remove multiple very large protected trees without a permit in November and December (plenty of photos available) despite not being approved for development. Since December 17th, 2020: The applicant never finished/continued for the CEQA Determination, Staff Report, and Public Hearing Notice portions of the subdivision. 5/6/22, 1:50 PM Mail - Joseph Lawlor - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/id/AAQkAGVmM2ZiODRiLTEwYzMtNDZiYi1iM2QxLTNiYWQ0YTdlNGJlZgAQAIy8YJf5w1FPjC9zraW9ZT0%3D 2/3 WATER QUALITY, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, SPECIES, ETC: YES SIGNIFICANT. Their report minimalized these effects. Watching for bird nests and planting tiny trees are not adequate. I want the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program specifically notified, not just "Public Works". I also demand a Full EIR. I believe there are much much more significant creek runoff and environmental issues that will affect our neighborhood than their report claims. NOISE: YES SUBSTIANTIAL: The sound level coming from Grayson Road has already TREMENDOUSLY increased. I am now awakened on Grayson Roads every garbage day morning by trucks. Before the developer began illegally taking out trees, I never heard traffic from Grayson road once in 18 years. Once 82 trees more are removed, the sound will be unbearable in a once tranquil neighborhood. DEGRADING EXISTING VISUAL CHARACTER: YES SUBSTIANTIAL. Our neighborhood is surrounded by greenbelt. They should not be allowed to take away the charm of this area, that 5/6/22, 1:50 PM Mail - Joseph Lawlor - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/id/AAQkAGVmM2ZiODRiLTEwYzMtNDZiYi1iM2QxLTNiYWQ0YTdlNGJlZgAQAIy8YJf5w1FPjC9zraW9ZT0%3D 3/3 serves as habitat and give no real attempt at mitigating their detrimental affects. SUBSTANTIAL LIGHT AND GLARE: YES SUBSTIANTIAL: We have no street lights in our area, we look at the stars at night. Their report clearly states "could create a potentially significant environmental effect and nighttime views". They then say that their mitigating solution is to install "streetlights that face down". That is IS NOT a Mitigating control measure whatsoever. You are granting waivers for the developer to not meet many standards, try finding a way to do the same for the residents who have lived on this street for 60 plus years. I understand it is their property, but the County has the duty to not allow a "Neg Dec" since they have provided nothing substantial in their plan to outweigh the harm and they have not proven themselves as upright business people. Leaving more trees, re-planting mature trees, building sound barriers, not putting in street lights, hiring a biologist to watch them as they work and taking a good hard look at the new impervious surface that could quickly degrade our creek, smoother it and/or cause flooding. Why is a "bad actor" being allowed to circumvent the correct CEQUA process with inconsequential mitigating factors. Please tell me when a public meeting will be held. I was not notified previously and feel not enough time is being allotted for public comments. I do not know who else did not receive this. L Friedman-Vasquez Don't Wait for the Storm to Pass, Learn To Dance in the Rain! Re: Grayson Road Lacey Friedman <laceydoxie@yahoo.com> Wed 5/4/2022 11:10 AM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> As I stated in my introduction, there’s not been adequate time for us to review this, nor time to determine if we as a neighborhood will be hiring A land use attorney. This MNDis incomplete and no one can find the tentative map. I am requesting a 30 day extension. How many other neighbors do you need to hear from before this request can be granted? Sent from my iPhone Grayson road Lacey Friedman <laceydoxie@yahoo.com> Fri 5/6/2022 9:51 AM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> 1) Can you please share the state clearinghouse ID number that you submitted for the Grayson project? As I understand it that would necessitate a 30 day, rather than 20 day review period. Additionally, I have read that the typical CEQA time periods should be extended if all information is not available for review. I would think the tentative map would count as information that we have not been given to review. 2) Can you provide me with some neighborhoods where I can go to see various types of street lights … especially in areas where new homes were built with lights but the nearby older homes are not-lighted. The environmental report stated “significant glare and light” can be expected. (That would make sense since we do not currently have any street lights and they propose to also remove 82 trees. ) The developer stated to mitigate that they would install the street lights facing down. Where can I see neighborhoods with street lights that face other than down? Thank you. Sent from my iPhone Grayson Road Subdivision Project Lauren West <laurenrwest12@gmail.com> Thu 5/5/2022 11:21 AM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Dear Mr. Lawlor, My name is Lauren West, and I live on Mohawk Drive, which is directly behind this lot on Grayson Road. All of us who live here have been watching the work being done over the past ten months with growing dismay at all the destruction. We received no notifications or updates on what was happening, despite attempts by some to reach out to the county and find out, until the letter that is dated April 22, 2022,. In this letter, a brief summary of the project was given as well as a link to the full report. The recipients of this letter were only given until May 12, 2022, to submit any comments. Additionally, not everyone on Mohawk Drive was even sent a letter, although this construction project would be disruptive to everyone who lives here. Just under three weeks is not nearly enough time for us to go over the detailed report and make our comments. There are many topics that our neighborhood wishes to bring to the attention of the developers and landowners, and we need more than a few weeks to do so. I ask that you give us at least 60 days for a review and to submit comments. Thank you, Lauren May 30, 2022 Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Community Development Division Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us Re: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, County File #CDSD20-09531 Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (Revised) Comments submitted via email Dear Mr. Lawlor, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project and mitigated negative declaration (MND). My mother lives on Iroquois Drive in the neighborhood south of this project, and will be impacted by elements of the project such as noise, traffic, and loss of the rural character her neighborhood and surrounding area enjoys. I write on her behalf, as well as my own. In addition, the project will have both local and regional natural resource impacts, including but not limited to wildlife, habitat and water quality impacts. I have concerns about the project and the project MND, as provided in my comments that follow. Project Description The concept of a vesting tentative should be explained in the project description so the public understands the advantage the developer is receiving from the county, and what he should provide in return for being granted this advantage. The developer is receiving the beneﬁt of a vested right to proceed with the subdivision in substantial compliance with the regulations in effect at the time the project is deemed complete by the county; this protects the developer from potential future changes in regulations. In exchange for this protection, the developer should be required to provide additional details for the project, such as ﬂoor plans, elevations, architectural plans; landscaping plans; parking details; and so forth for all units, including accessory dwelling units. It does not appear that this vesting tentative map goes beyond what would normally be required for a tentative map and environmental review, and there do not appear to be any speciﬁc requirements for vesting tentative maps in the County’s subdivision regulations. The beneﬁts the developer is receiving should be clearly described, as should the additional plan requirements for being granted the privilege of a vesting tentative map. If there are no requirements beyond those of a regular tentative map, the county must justify why the development is being granted the privilege of a vesting tentative map. The project description is lacking sufficient detail so as to serve as the basis for addressing potential project impacts. If accessory dwelling units are included in the project, the project description must include this, and all environmental impact assessments should consider the extra impact burden resulting from the additional dwellings. The site and area description makes no mention of the riparian, oak woodland, and other habitat the exists throughout the project site, nor does it mention the wildlife that utilizes the site. The project description does not state the distance from the creek to the riparian corridor setback, nor does it describe the width of the riparian corridor proposed to be protected. The description of the surrounding area as representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County is vague and inaccurate. The area immediately surrounding the subject project site is very Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 2 12 different from development across Grayson Road, and deserves to be accurately characterized. The project description mentions a waiver of retaining wall setback requirements, but nowhere in the MND is the location of the retaining wall mentioned or shown on any project plans. The project plans lack labels for many of the lines shown, including the top of bank and the centerline of the creek channel which should be clearly labeled. Finally, the CEQA process for this project remains ﬂawed, despite the recirculation of the MND. As provided by PRC Section 21091.(b), the public review period for a proposed negative declaration or proposed mitigated negative declaration shall not be less than 20 days. If the proposed negative declaration or proposed mitigated negative declaration is for a proposed project where a state agency is the lead agency, a responsible agency, or a trustee agency; a state agency otherwise has jurisdiction by law with respect to the project; or the proposed project is of sufficient statewide, regional, or areawide signiﬁcance as determined pursuant to the guidelines certiﬁed and adopted pursuant to Section 21083, the review period shall be at least 30 days, and the lead agency shall provide the document, in an electronic form as required by the Office of Planning and Research, to the State Clearinghouse for review and comment by state agencies. Further, CEQA Guidelines Section 15386 deﬁnes a trustee agency as a “state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California." In accordance with PRC Section 21091(b), the public comment period during which a complete copy of the MND was provided for public review should have been 30 days. This is based on the clear potential for this project to impact resources for which, at a minimum, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Regional Water Quality Control Board are trustee agencies, and potentially responsible agencies. The fact that mitigation measures are provided to minimize impacts to these resources for which these agencies are responsible is evidence these are trustee agencies for the project pursuant to PRC 21091(b). The initial public comment period was for 20 days, and the MND that was circulated at that time was incomplete, lacking all supporting documentation, negating that initial comment period. The MND was re-released with supporting documentation, but was again only released for a 20- day comment period, despite the fact that the MND was also submitted to the State Clearinghouse as required by PRC Section 21091(b) on the same day the MND was re- released to the public. It seems clear the county has acknowledged the involvement of one or more state trustee agencies, and therefore should have provided a 30-day comment period during which a complete MND was available for public comment. At the present time, the complete MND was made available to the public for only 20 days, contrary to the requirements of PRC 21091(b). 1. AESTHETICS c) While this area may be considered urbanized by the Census Bureau, the visual character of the area is still relatively rural, with signiﬁcant tree cover and larger lots. The proposed reduction in lot width and lot size combined with the exceptionally large homes and signiﬁcant lot coverage proposed for this subdivision (over 1 acre) will result in a development that is deﬁnitely not in keeping with the immediate surrounding area. The ﬁnding that this residential project is consistent with other residential development immediately surrounding this project is not correct, and cannot be supported with the proposed exceptions to lot width and size. The density of the development needs to be Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 3 12 reduced, and the lot size and width waivers eliminated while increasing setbacks from the creek to the proposed residential development in order to make this ﬁnding. Aesthetics 1: This mitigation measure makes no mention of ensuring new lighting does not impact the riparian area. The measure states that light will be contained within the project site, but the riparian area is within the project site. Performance standards should specify lighting shall not be allowed to impact the creek and riparian corridor, and shall be fully contained horizontally and vertically within the developed portion of the project. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES General Comment - The biological report was completed in May 2021 and updated in February 2022, according to the initial study. The report states the ﬁeld work was conducted in April of 2021. The arborist report was completed in May of 2020. It has been reported by adjoining neighbors that tree cutting resulting in creek and riparian corridor impacts occurred relatively recently. It does not appear that the biological report or the MND reveal this presumably unpermitted tree cutting. Was the loss of habitat that could likely have resulted from tree removal considered to be the baseline for the identiﬁcation of impacts when the biological report was updated in February 2022? This tree removal occurred pre-project and clearly in anticipation of the project; it should be revealed and discussed. Further, there is no discussion regarding what public agencies with jurisdiction over potentially impacted resources were contacted about this project prior to completion of the initial study, including but not limited to CDFW, RWQCB, and CCCWP, and what their comments were. a) This section lists a number of species that were observed or could be present on the property, but there is no discussion regarding how the project might impact these species, and how the proposed mitigation would reduce those impacts. Analysis is required to document that the mitigation is sufficient to address project impacts. Also, while there are several avian species mentioned as potentially nesting on the site, there is no discussion of the Migratory Bird Act and the requirements it provides. This project has the potential to have a signiﬁcant adverse effect through both temporary construction impacts, permanent habitat loss, and ongoing disturbance from proposed residences. All mitigation currently proposed is presumably to mitigate temporary construction impacts such as noise, tree removal, and grading. Again, the analysis as to what impacts are being addressed and how the mitigation will address those impacts is missing. More importantly, there is no discussion of the potential permanent adverse impacts that will result from the complete removal of habitat from everywhere on the property except the riparian corridor, including some trees whose canopy is located in the riparian corridor, and the introduction of residential uses, thereby precluding reestablishment of the habitat. A thorough analysis of this impact must be provided. Biology 1: Pre-construction surveys should include all migratory birds if construction is to occur during the nesting season. This requirement was part of the biological report suggested mitigation MM#3, but does not appear in Biology 1. Pre-construction surveys must include not only the project site, but also the area of inﬂuence, as provided in MM#3 of the biological report. Further, this mitigation measure needs to include a requirement for monitoring by a qualiﬁed biologist during construction to determine if birds are being Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 4 12 disturbed and if so, if a larger buffer is needed. Again, this was included in MM#3 but excluded from Biology 1. Biology 1 should include the requirement that a qualiﬁed biologist monitor nesting sites and prescribe further steps that must be taken to avoid impacts to nesting birds, including not just increased buffers but the potential cessation of construction activities until the nests are no longer active. Biology 1 lacks sufficient performance standards to ensure protection of nesting birds and as currently drafted, does not reduce potential avian impacts below a threshold of signiﬁcance. Biology 3: This mitigation measure is completely lacking any performance standards specifying what is required if pond turtles are found. It simply states a survey is required to determine presence or absence. The mitigation measure must include performance standards to address how impacts to pond turtles will be mitigated, so a preconstruction survey reveal their presence. b) The MND contains no description of how the riparian setback was established, and no description of the width of the riparian setback from the creek channel, centerline, or from the top-of-bank. Neither the creek centerline nor the top-of-bank are shown on the development plans (or perhaps they are just not labeled). As shown on Figure 11 in the biological report, in some locations the top-of-bank is either commensurate with or extends beyond the riparian setback, which apparently is the drip line of the trees that were determined to comprise the northerly boundary of the riparian corridor. Policy 8.89 of the general plan Conservation Element requires a minimum 50-ft. setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek. How does the proposed riparian setback compare to the minimum 50- ft. setback? The MND states that no trees will be removed from the riparian corridor, yet there are a number of trees whose individual canopies, or canopy cluster the trees are part of, extend into the riparian corridor and are being removed The trees to be removed include at a minimum tree 114, 115, 116, 135, 136, 169, 169b, 170, 171b, 194, and 195, the majority of which are oaks. Why do these trees need to be removed, and what is the justiﬁcation for their removal? Neighbor reports indicate trees have been recently removed from this property that were located close enough to the creek so as to deposit debris from their removal into the channel. The arborist report was prepared in May of 2020, well before the tree removal occurred. Any tree removal needs to be documented and discussed as part of the MND analysis, appropriate violations issued if trees were in fact removed without a permit, and mitigation for the loss of these trees must be required, whether the trees were removed from the riparian corridor or not. The developer cannot be allowed to reduce his mitigation burden by preemptively removing trees. A fence is proposed to be installed along the riparian corridor. The fence is described as “wildlife friendly”, but there is no discussion as to what that means, which must be provided to document how this fence mitigates impacts. How will the fence be maintained, and how will the county insure future property owners do not remove the fence? It appears the riparian setback area is based on the drip line of trees in the riparian corridor. The line deﬁning the riparian corridor is anything but straight, with many, many small twists and turns. How is a fence supposed to be constructed along such a line? Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 5 12 The MND needs to clarify the difference between the riparian setback area and the creek structure setback line, and what can occur within each area. Has the County determined that Grayson Creek, or at least the portion within this subdivision, is a “protected watercourse” due to its signiﬁcant riparian habitat, and thereby requires protection in its natural state pursuant to County Code section 914-4.002, and if not, why not? Mitigation Measure Biology 6 states that the riparian setback area will be deed restricted, precluding any kind of development, including grading. Sheet 1 of the project plans shows the limit of the riparian area with a note that no grading will be allowed. Beyond that line, Sheet 1 shows the creek structure setback line labeled with a note that states developer to relinquish development rights within creek structure setback area. It would appear that grading would be allowed within the creek structure setback area, which would mean that grading would be allowed up to and beyond the top of the creek bank, which is inappropriate, and demands the extension of the riparian setback area to a point well beyond the top of bank. The MND should analyze how the creek and riparian corridor would be impacted during construction, and by the establishment and ongoing activities of permanent residential uses, all of which will occur very close to Grayson Creek. The MND should explain the basis for the establishment of the boundary of the riparian corridor and how the basis was determined, why trees whose canopies extend into the corridor are being removed and the impact of their removal, and how the proposed riparian setback is sufficient to protect the riparian habitat and creek from construction and ultimately residential uses. It currently does not appear the riparian setback is sufficient to protect Grayson Creek since grading would be allowed beyond the top of bank outside the riparian setback, and tree canopy is being removed within the riparian corridor. In order to protect the creek, the riparian setback must extend well beyond the top of bank, which is not what is being proposed, and thus leaves Grayson Creek vulnerable to construction and residential activities. Impacts to Grayson Creek and the riparian corridor are not mitigated below a threshold of signiﬁcance. c) Regarding the protection of state and federally protected wetlands, the ﬁnding of less than signiﬁcant impact is based on a number of things. The ﬁnding is partially based on the creation of a riparian setback, which as discussed above in b), does not appear adequate to protect Grayson Creek. The ﬁnding is also based on the creation of a creek structure setback, as required by Mitigation Measure Biology 6. It appears this setback area excludes fencing, landscaping, and structures except for drainage structures. However, trees and other vegetation will be removed from the creek structure setback area and grading will apparently be allowed in this setback, including beyond the top of bank along Grayson Creek as noted above. These activities will impact wildlife, the riparian corridor, and the creek by permanently removing valuable habitat, protected trees, and by exposing the crowns of trees remaining that are currently part of a group of trees as well as exposing their root systems to grading impacts. Once these exceptionally large homes are built, with the majority of the lots along the setback having very little backyard, future owners will undoubtedly expand their backyards into the setback area, which is not allowed. How will this expansion be prevented? I doubt the county will monitor the situation, and the backyards are not visible form the street, so how does the public have conﬁdence that the setback area will be left undeveloped and natural as required? Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 6 12 Sheet 4 of the development plans provides some information as to how the creek structure setback was calculated. It appears that only one cross-section was provided at the east end of Grayson Creek with six cross-sections on the westerly end. There are no cross- sections in the middle of this stretch of creek. What was the basis for the location of the cross-sections? How was the number and location of cross-sections determined to be adequate for the establishment of the structure setback lines? How was it determined that the entire creek section is adequately represented by these cross-sections? Regarding structure setback lines, County Code section 914-14.012(d) states that where signiﬁcant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required by section (c) of this same section (the limits the subdivision utilizes), the county may extend the setback line to include such areas. What was the basis for not requiring this additional area, given the number of oaks and other trees that are proposed to be removed, particularly since the trees being removed have crowns that are part of the riparian canopy? Construction impacts in the creek structure setback area and throughout the project site, most speciﬁcally grading (including up to and over the top of the bank of Grayson Creek) will result in a signiﬁcant potential for erosion, resulting in the potential for sediment transport into Grayson Creek, yet this impact is neither identiﬁed nor mitigated. MM #8 in the biological report is proposed to address this impact, but is not included in the MND. This impact must be addressed and mitigated. The potential temporary and permanent impacts to federal and state waters associated with this project have not been adequately identiﬁed, analyzed as to how proposed mitigation will address the impacts, nor have the impacts been fully mitigated and thus have not been reduced below a threshold of signiﬁcance. d) This discussion regarding wildlife corridors ﬁnds that the proposed development would not signiﬁcantly impact wildlife movement in the region because the project site is small and because of proposed mitigation. This property is a relatively large area of natural habitat and further, the size of an area is not necessarily directly proportional to its value as a wildlife corridor. The claim that this is not a wildlife corridor is also supported by a statement that the property is currently occupied by existing residences and associated improvements. However, the residences are not occupied, and their existence does not foreclose the value of this property as a wildlife corridor. In fact, neighbors report seeing a lot of wildlife pass through the property. There again is mention of a fence described as “wildlife friendly” proposed to be installed along the riparian corridor, with no description of what wildlife friendly means or how the fence will mitigate impacts to wildlife movement that currently occurs unrestricted. It is stated that there will no tree removal in the riparian corridor, but this is not the case as discussed above, which notes the removal of trees whose canopies are part of the riparian corridor, and there were potentially trees already recently removed. How will the virtually complete removal of existing habitat everywhere on this site except the relatively narrow riparian corridor, to be replaced with development of residences and their associated disruptive activities, not impede use of wildlife corridors and nursery sites currently located on this property? Is the 1.5 acres of riparian corridor that will have residential uses directly adjacent to it sufficient to address all current wildlife migration and nursery use on the property? Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 7 12 Missing from this discussion is identiﬁcation of the connectivity of Grayson Creek with offsite portions of the watercourse and habitats. This is not an isolated section of a creek or habitat, as demonstrated by its use by local wildlife. This information must be provided, and it must be demonstrated that loss of a signiﬁcant amount of habitat, coupled with the introduction of residential uses, will not interfere with wildlife movement through this property. The conclusion that the project poses a less than signiﬁcant impact to the movement of wildlife is not fully supported and remains potentially signiﬁcant. e) This discussion makes no mention of CEQA section 21083.4 regarding the protection and mitigation of impacts to oak woodland. Figure 10 maps a signiﬁcant area of oak woodland, in addition to a similarly large area of mixed woodland. CEQA impacts relative to this section of the CEQA statutes should be addressed. As mentioned previously, trees have reportedly already been removed from this property, undoubtedly in anticipation of this project. There is no discussion about this removal, including whether or not the number of trees to be removed as part of the project include the trees already removed, or is in addition to those trees. Was a permit obtained for this removal? What are the ﬁndings that were made made to support removal of these protected trees? As mentioned above, if trees were previously removed, they must be documented and any prescribed mitigation must apply to their removal. One of the reasons tree removal can be approved according the county code is “reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot.” Subdivision is a privilege, not a right, so what determines “reasonable development”? It is certainly not synonymous with “maximum development”, yet that appears to be the standard applied here. This project could certainly be redesigned to avoid such extensive tree and habitat removal, including creating fewer lots and a larger riparian corridor/open space area, and requiring smaller development footprints as part of the vesting tentative map approval. CEQA requires avoidance of environmental impacts as a ﬁrst step, yet there seems to be no consideration or discussion of how removal of these trees and habitat could be avoided, nor any justiﬁcation provided for their removal. The fact that a property owner does not have a right to subdivide, combined with CEQA’s requirement for impact avoidance where feasible and considering the other impacts of this project, would point to the need to signiﬁcantly reduce the density of this development. Biology 8: This mitigation measure calls for planting trees in all “open areas” in the project site. What constitutes an open area? Exactly where are these trees proposed to be planted, in what will be the front, back and side yards of the lots being created, which guarantees they will stand a strong chance of being removed in the future once homeowners want to landscape? Most if not all the trees that should be replanted will get quite large, and are not the kind of trees that people want directly adjacent to their homes. There are no performance standards included in this mitigation measure to specify: 1) where exactly these trees should be planted so future homeowners can landscape their yards (which they most certainly will); 2) what happens if the trees die within a speciﬁed period of time (i.e. how and when will they be replaced and who will replace them); 3) minimum plant size (there is a maximum) and a requirement that the trees must be from a seed source native to the area; 4) Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 8 12 safeguards to insure the new trees are not removed by a future homeowner since they will initially be small and not qualiﬁed as a protected tree unless a mitigation measure speciﬁes them as such, and since removal in the future even with a permit would be contrary to required mitigation; and ﬁnally, 5) how all of this will be monitored. As proposed, this mitigation measure does not reduce the impact of this tree removal below a threshold of signiﬁcance, even considering other proposed mitigation measures. 6. ENERGY a) A less than signiﬁcant ﬁnding for this section is partially supported by a statement that the “project is located in an urban residential neighborhood, within walking distance of a commercial district, and within biking distance of the Pleasant Hill Bart Station. The close proximity to these amenities could reduce the automobile trip generation from the project; thus, reducing energy consumption.” This statement neglects to recognize that ﬁrst, this is not a typical urban neighborhood with fully developed sidewalks and bike lanes. In fact, sidewalks are missing along much of Grayson Road, and walking on Grayson is dangerous given the excessive speed at which traffic travels on this road. Second, the county is giving the developer a pass on constructing sidewalks in his Grayson Road frontage while adding to the need for sidewalks, further insuring there will likely never be completed sidewalks along this road. Further, are there bike lanes to safely travel from the subdivision to the Pleasant Hill Bart Station? 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Without an erosion control plan, which by law will be a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (RWQCB), this impact associated with construction could be potentially signiﬁcant. If “existing regulations” are cited, performance standards that will address the impact should be provided. g) See comment under Wildﬁre 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a) There is no acknowledgement or discussion in this section regarding impacts to surface water from construction activities, most importantly grading. The grading limit appears to go up to and over the creek top-of-bank. It is assumed that, given the size of the project area, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required under the authority of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and best management practices implemented to prevent silt and other construction related substances from entering the creek and storm drains. Without acknowledgement of this potentially signiﬁcant impact, analysis of the impact, and proposed mitigation which must include adequate performance standards, impacts to water quality from construction activities remain an unidentiﬁed signiﬁcant impact. In addition, as with many other sections of the MND, the potential impacts to surface water or ground water are not identiﬁed, and there is no analysis as to how requirements or mitigation (which is missing and needed) addresses the impact. b) This discussion does not address the question for the portion of the initial study. The question is not about whether wells are required, but about whether groundwater supplies Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 9 12 and recharge will be impeded to the extent that it will impede sustainable groundwater management. Clearly, this project will interfere with groundwater supplies and recharge, given the extent of over 1 acre of impermeable surface being proposed, and with the direction of stormwater runoff from impermeable surfaces into the storm drain system. I would suspect the project could also impact the amount of runoff that feeds the creek, but there is no analysis of this potential impact, which should be provided. This discussion does not support a ﬁnding of less than signiﬁcant impact, and is actually completely irrelevant to the question. c) Section ii claims that the project will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff. The project proposes a signiﬁcant amount of impervious surface compared to what currently exists, resulting in a substantial increase in runoff compared to current conditions, as well as a change in drainage pattern since runoff with be channeled into the storm drain system. This may not result in ﬂooding as this section concludes, but the basis for the claim is erroneous. 11. LAND USE PLANNING b) The calculation for the number of base units does not appear to be accurate. The MND states the the net project site acreage (gross acreage minus the private right-of-way) is approximately 2.76 acres. It further states that when calculating the allowed density “conservatively”, when multiplied by 2.9 dwelling units per acre, the result is 8.004, which the county claims results in 9 base units due to rounding. The calculation result is actually 8.00, but the County has chosen to take the resulting calculation out one more decimal place to 8.004, despite the fact that this is certainly not standard protocol and despite the fact that the net project site acreage is stated using two decimal places, as is the density per acre. Acreages for parcel size are not routinely carried out three decimal places. It appears this is being done to stretch the results in order to justify adding one more lot to this project, and is not common practice nor acceptable. Using the county’s assumption of net acreage, and holding all things consistent internal to this project as well as consistent with standard practice, the project’s base density would be calculated at 8.00, or 8 dwelling units. Using 8 base units and following the calculations provided in the initial study, one moderate unit would constitute 13% of the base lots, and thus the project would qualify for an 8% density bonus, resulting in 8.64 units, rounded up to 9 total lots. Table 3-4 of the county’s general plan Land Use Element states that “net acreage includes all land area used exclusively for residential purposes, and excludes streets, highways, and all other public rights-of-way. Net acreage is assumed to constitute 75 percent of gross acreage for all uses, except for the Multi-Family designations, where it is assumed to comprise 80 percent.” Considering this deﬁnition, the county’s “conservative” density calculation appears to be quite the opposite. For example, a more conservative estimate could be based on 75% of the 3.05 gross project acreage, which results in 2.29 net acres, multiplied by 2.9 is 6.63 which rounds up to 7 base units, rather than 8 as described in the previous paragraph, or 9 as the county is proposing. One moderate unit would be 15% of 7 base units qualifying for a 10% bonus, which would allow one additional unit for a total of 8, two lots less than what is being proposed. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 10 12 However, in this case, based on the deﬁnition of net acreage, there are at least two areas that should be removed from the net acreage calculation, 0.29 acres for the street and 1.5 deed restricted acres for the Grayson Creek riparian corridor where no development would be allowed. Mitigation measure Biology 7 requires that the creek structure setback area be protected from development via a permanent deed restriction and dedication of development rights to the County. These areas are therefore clearly excluded from use for residential purposes, and cannot be included in the net acreage for the project, but the size of the creek structure area is not provided. Just considering the 1.5 acre riparian corridor and the subdivision roadway results in a net acreage of 1.26 for the project, which when multiplied by 2.9 maximum allowed density, results in 3.65 or 4 base units when rounded. One moderate unit divided by the base units equals 25%, allowing for a 20% density bonus, multiplied by 4 base units equals 4.8, allowing one additional unit for a total of 5 units. Further reduction in allowed density could result if additional restricted acreage for the creek structure setback area is not included in the 1.5 acres, and would thus also need to be deducted from the gross acreage. Limiting this project to no more than 5 lots (or potentially fewer as noted above) would allow either larger lots with the required setbacks more in keeping with the surrounding area and would allow signiﬁcantly more trees to be retained, or it would allow a larger riparian corridor with lots perhaps remaining a bit smaller and clustered closer to Grayson, again allowing more trees to remain and offering additional protection for Grayson Creek. This approach would also be consistent with the county’s general plan Chapter 3 Land Use Element, where the description of the land use designation Single-Family Residential-Low Density states that unique environmental characteristics of a parcel may justify larger lot sizes. Requested waivers should be revisited using what would be the correct calculation for the number of allowed lots in this project, depending on the ﬁnal calculation. The waiver of lot width with the number of lots currently proposed creates lot widths completely inconsistent with the area immediately surrounding this property. It also reduces the area where 83 trees will need to be replanted and retained because they are mitigation and therefore cannot ever be removed. With the reduced lot size, lot width, and lot setbacks, trees will need to be replanted close to homes, posing future problems. The waiver of curb, gutter and sidewalk poses a safety concern, as discussed in the Transportation section. The waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls needs to be explained; what is the waiver being requested, why is it being requested, and where is the retaining wall? Consideration must be given to the the signiﬁcant number of waivers requested by the applicant. The substantial ﬁnancial value of those waivers to the applicant realized via increased density and a waiver of sidewalks on Grayson, must be weighed against the cost of those waivers to the public via resource impacts, loss of a required sidewalk, increased traffic impacts, and so forth. The waivers are likely worth tens of thousands of dollars, all for the small public beneﬁt of a single moderate income home on the smallest lot in the worst location in the subdivision. The granting of these waivers is not in the public interest, and should be limited. 13. NOISE a)This section asks whether the project would generate substantial temporary or permanent noise. Construction noise may be temporary, but it will be signiﬁcant in an otherwise quiet Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 11 12 neighborhood for both nearby property owners as well as wildlife. Temporary noise impacts to wildlife should be addressed in the Biological Resources section of this initial study, but temporary construction noise impacts to nearby properties must be addressed in this section, and it is not. Mitigation is required to avoid construction noise impacts, including limitations on days and hours when noise can occur, a requirement to have adequate mufflers on construction equipment, and so forth, i.e. standard best management practices. There should be a requirement for notiﬁcation to neighbors regarding when noise can be expected, and who to contact if there are noise issues. As currently analyzed, noise impacts are not fully identiﬁed and analyzed, and remain potentially signiﬁcant. 17. TRANSPORTATION a) It is interesting that a sidewalk is proposed within the subdivision, but no sidewalk is proposed on Grayson. The public, both pedestrians and drivers, will be impacted by increased traffic on Grayson, with no improvements to compensate. While there is limited existing sidewalk on the south side of Grayson, and also incomplete sidewalk on the north side, shouldn’t the goal be to gradually provide sidewalks all along Grayson, rather than grant waivers to not require sidewalks because the developer does not want to provide them? Complete frontage improvements are standard requirements of subdivisions, and sidewalks are needed on Grayson. In the Energy section of the initial study, the claim is made that the project is located within walking distance of a commercial district. However, there are incomplete sidewalks on Grayson, so walking to the commercial district has safety issues. Further, the statement is made that adjacent properties that front Grayson are not expected to develop in the future, meaning that they are not anticipated to have to provide frontage sidewalks in the near future, the rationale being that there is no point in requiring this subdivision to provide them now. So if those lots do develop, then isn’t it likely they will also ask for and receive a waiver of frontage requirements because their neighbor, this subdivision, received the waiver and thus there will be no sidewalk to for them to connect to? The waiver of frontage requirements is short sighted, and sets a precedent that will result in either no complete sidewalks on Grayson, or the public having to pay for future sidewalks when someone gets hit by a speeding car on Grayson. The new homes will contribute additional pedestrians to an area with fragmented sidewalks where it is already unsafe to walk, thereby creating a health and safety risk for those pedestrians and adding to the risk for existing pedestrians due to increased traffic on a road with few sidewalks. Regarding the trip generation discussion, the neighborhood has been told that the new homes will include ADUs. If this is the case, then the trip generation will increase. This situation, if true, should be described and analyzed. c) Although the project may not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature speciﬁcally, it will certainly contribute more traffic to Grayson Road. At certain times of the day, it can be challenging to enter Grayson from Mohawk, especially because traffic often travels faster than the speed limit The stopping time may be adequate for 35 mph for the new intersection, but it does not match the reality of the speed on Grayson. Cars have gathered speed by the time they reach Mohawk coming from either direction, and will make Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration May 30, 2022 Page of 12 12 entering Grayson from Mohawk that much more challenging. This project will increase traffic risks above the current level for existing homes. 20. WILDFIRE While this area is not directly within a high ﬁre hazard area, the ﬁre risk is higher than a standard urbanized area. There is a signiﬁcant amount of vegetation including trees, shrubs, and grassland in and around this area. There are also overhead power lines, which together pose a ﬁre risk. Will power lines be placed underground in the subdivision? I could not locate this information on the plans, not to say it’s not there. Generally, completely dismissing the increased ﬁre risk brought about by climate change, and dismissing the risk that continues to increase with hotter temperatures, ongoing drought, and increasing population density, is not appropriate. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Based on the comments above, without additional analysis and mitigation, the project impacts remain potentially signiﬁcant. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my comments. This project has potentially signiﬁcant environmental impacts due to the habitat located on the project site, the number of lots being proposed, and the waivers being requested. All impacts have not been identiﬁed, analyzed, or mitigated below a threshold of signiﬁcance. A signiﬁcant reduction in the number of lots, by at least ﬁfty percent or more as discussed in my comments, would be more appropriate for maintaining the existing habitat values on this site and protecting the public interest, while allowing applicant the privilege of subdividing the property. Sincerely, Lisa D. Shikany 115 Harlan Way Fortuna, CA 95540 Grayson Rd Development Project Patrick <pat.king@gmail.com> Wed 5/4/2022 3:08 PM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Mr. Lawlor, I am writing in opposition to the proposed development project on 1024 and 1026 Grayson, County File No. CDSD20-09531, and requesting a 60-day extension of the public review period. This is because the MND is incomplete, missing the project site plans, and other docs like the a bio report that will allow the neighborhood to fully see the impact of this project. The VTM cannot even be accessed online currently. This proposed development is squarely in the middle of a wood deck restoration project along upper Grayson Creek that is sponsored by The Mt. Diablo Audubon Society and Pleasant Hill Scout Troop 405. 12 wood duck boxes are installed there along with a lot of state-wide publicity among birding constituencies, and we fear that this development would remove the last chance we have for bringing wood ducks back to Pleasant Hill. Please let me know if you have any questions, and please let me know if the request for a 60-day extension is granted. Thank you, Patrick & Mary King 2001 Mohawk Drive Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 925-935-5464 From:Patrick To:Joseph Lawlor Cc:mfordeking@yahoo.com Subject:Public Comments on Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, County File #CDSD20-09531 ,Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (Revised) Date:Tuesday, May 31, 2022 1:16:06 PM Attachments:neighborhood.png May 31, 2022 Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Community Development Division Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us Re: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, County File #CDSD20-09531 Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (Revised) Dear Mr. Lawlor, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the revised MND document, even though 20 days is not much time! These public comments are inclusive of earlier emails that I have sent. I appreciate the importance of your job and the public service that you provide. My interest in this project is two-fold. First, I am a homeowner in this neighborhood, residing at 2001 Mohawk Drive in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. Secondly, I am a member of both the Mt. Diablo Audubon Society and Friends of Pleasant Hill Creeks. I served on the board at MDAS for many years, so I have an interest in preserving the habitat for the many species who make this stretch of Grayson Creek their home, and I have knowledge that goes with that interest. I’ve met with Mt. Diablo Audubon and Friends of Pleasant Hill Creeks about this proposed development project along Upper Grayson Creek. Neither group has been afforded sufficient time to make public comment, as those need to go through board meetings and appropriate human resource volunteers assigned. However, they did provide expertise and advice that are part of my comments. Importance of Habitat Salmon made a right turn up Grayson Creek from the Contra Costa Canal this year, a wonderful development. There is hope that they can return to their natural spawning ground on the east side of Briones. Upper Grayson Creek (the stretch west of Taylor Blvd along Grayson Rd and Reliez Valley) affords them the only viable route to Briones because Upper Grayson Creek is the only stream that runs year around from Briones. Salmon will someday pass directly by this proposed development along the creek. Is the County aware of this and has sufficient attention been paid to this issue? As the only year-around running creek, this stretch of creek is a rich greenbelt of habitat and a wildlife corridor for many species. It is a key habitat zone, because Upper Grayson Creek creates the only continuous water path that links eastern Briones to the Contra Costa Canal, and out to the Sacramento River Delta. Because of this, there is a wood duck restoration project going on along the creek as the wildlife corridor here has been identified as perfect for the return of the wood duck species to Pleasant Hill. Wood duck boxes are directly across the creek from the proposed development and directly adjacent. The project was funded by Mt. Diablo Audubon and Pleasant Hill Scout Troop 405, and is maintained by volunteers. Mammal species in the proposed development include bats, red fox, coyote, and bobcat. Mountain lions are rarely sited in the habitat which wander down from nearby Briones. Nesting bird species include Orange-Crowned Warbler, Yellow Warbler, Yellow-Rumped Warbler, Wilson's Warbler, Pacific-Slope Flycatcher, Brown Creeper, Brown-headed Cowbird, Black-headed Grosbeak, Allens & Anna's Hummingbird, Spotted & California Towhee, California Thrasher, Red-tailed Hawk, Red-shouldered Hawk, Sharp-Shinned Hawk, Coopers Hawk, Great-Horned Owl, Western Screech Owl, Acorn Woodpecker, Nuttalls Woodpecker, Downy Woodpeckers, Mourning Dove, White-Breasted Nuthatch, Red-Breasted Nuthatch, California Quail, Chestnut-backed Chickadee, Dark-eyed Junco, Oak Titmouse, Bushtit, American Robin, Wild Turkey, White-crowned Sparrow, Gold- crowned Sparrow, Song Sparrow, Stellars Jay, California Scrub Jay, Black Phoebe, Common Raven, Bewick’s Wren, House Finch, Turkey Vulture, among many others. The greenbelt is an oasis for migrant birds who pass through in springtime or come to winter here. Among them are Winter Wren, Western Tanager, Band-tailed Pigeon, Swallow species, and dozens of warbler and sparrow species. There is an Acorn Woodpecker rookery, and wintering Robins gather here in the hundreds. Almost 100 bird species have been documented along Grayson Creek in the last 3 years alone. That list is here: https://ebird.org/hotspot/L9110333?yr=all&m= There is already an infestation of Norway rats along the creek. Norway rats colonize near natural water sources (our creek) and enter buildings in search of food either through burrowing under the structure or through openings in the crawlspace or roof. I am wondering if the County has considered that the high density development proposal would mean many more structures that will increase the rat population that is already rampant here? At a minimum, 18” of cement footings and curtain wall should be required to prevent rat burrowing under and into these structures. And the developer should be required to irradicate these non-native rats along the creek property, extending outward 200 feet in both directions. The riparian habitat is replete with oak trees. From my experience permitting at the County offices, I understand that the whole area constitutes oak tree “clusters” or “groves” which come under special rules at the County. Has the proposed development been vetted from the perspective of these special rules at the county for oak tree clusters? Characteristics of Neighborhood The proposed development project is near the borders of 3 different jurisdictions, Lafayette, Pleasant Hill City, and Unincorporated Pleasant Hill, all of which Grayson Creek runs through. Regardless of jurisdiction, all of the homes along the creek, along Grayson Rd, and south of Grayson Rd, have consistently maintained large lots and large setbacks from the creek. Lot sizes are typically 1/3rd acre to 2/3rd acre, and setbacks are at least 100 feet from the center of the creek. And even within the Pleasant Hill city limits, which is just a small minority of the land along the creek, there is nothing close to the density being proposed and existing setbacks are similar to the Lafayette and unincorporated Pleasant Hill sections of the neighborhood. In fact the two adjacent homes directly to the west on Grayson Rd are on large lots with large setbacks, as are the homes along Mohawk Drive that border the other side of the creek. It would be extremely out of character for this neighborhood to have this proposed high density housing and with structures so close to the creek. The finding in 1.C (Aesthetics) that this project is consistent with other residential development immediately surrounding this project is erroneous, and quite frankly ignorant of the reality. A map is attached to this email letter which shows the neighborhood and plots. Density Calculation Issues As mentioned above, the proposed density of this project is ridiculously out of character for the neighborhood. But more than that, the calculation used by the country to determine this density appear erroneous in section 11.b. The net acreage calculation, from my understanding, is suppose to only include “all land areas used exclusively for residential” areas (Table 3-4 of the County General Plan for Land Use). And yet the County has used the area reserved for the riparian corridor in their calculations. This area is uninhabitable for residential and should not be part of the calculation. Mitigation measure Biology 7 says the creek setback area will be conveyed to the County for development purpose. It is not part of the residential area. Redoing your calculation in this respect would properly limit the development to 4-5 homes. And this result would help preserve the riparian corridor, the oak trees targeted for removal, and the character of the neighborhood. Setback Issues Addressing setback issues is very difficult because the maps provided in the MND are incomplete. I cannot tell where the center of the creek is in these maps. And I cannot tell the actual setback distances on these maps, the width of the top-of-the-slopes, and the height of the creek along the development project. I do know that a couple of measurements were taken, but this is a stretch of the creek that is quite variable in depth and width. I would like to see the map redone with accurate measurements notated all along the creek bed and crest. Then, I would like to see setback calculations based on this data for each structure that is adjacent to the creek, and I would like to see them noted clearly on the map. Generally, we know that setbacks in this area are about 100 feet from the center of the creek as I noted earlier. You can look at the homes adjacent and west of these properties in Pleasant Hill, and the homes along the creek in unincorporated Pleasant Hill and Lafayette for confirmation of this. If the County desires a smaller setback, despite the critical importance of this greenbelt corridor to wildlife, I think a fair question is Why? Further, the “riparian setback” needs to extend beyond the top of the bank. There are parts of the map that appear to show the riparian setback within the construction zone. This is inconsistent with other language in the MND. It appears in Mitigation Measure Biology 6, Sheet 1, that grading will be allowed within the creek setback area. This is completely irresponsible. The riparian setback should be extended well beyond the creek bank by at least 50’. Public Safety Issues Grayson Rd has become more and more trafficked over the years as housing developments have sprung up out Reliez Valley Road and Bear Creek Road. It is a common “shortcut” drivers take during commute hours to work around congested routes, and speeding along Grayson Rd has become commonplace. The change over the last 15 years is acute. Children use this road to walk and bike to nearby schools along Gregory Lane, notably Strandwood School, Christ The King, and Pleasant Hill Adventist Academy. And yet there is no continuous sidewalk to these schools until you cross Taylor Blvd and continue on Gregory Lane. This stretch of Grayson Road is dangerous for kids and any pedestrian, particularly during commute hours. The development project will add more cars, pedestrians, and cyclists. The developer should be required to create a sidewalk in front of their development properties to protect kids and adult pedestrians. They should be required to pay for a Stop Sign on the corner of Grayson Rd & Mohawk Drive, heading easterly toward Taylor Blvd, as there is already a speeding problem on Grayson Rd for cars exiting Mohawk Drive and this project will exacerbate this problem. They should be required to pay for “No Thru Traffic” signs at both ends of Grayson Rd. This is consistent with the same signs that were added recently to alleviate traffic on Reliez Valley Rd starting at Grayson Rd a couple of years ago, and would extend the same protection to our adjacent neighborhood. Summary Thank you for the opportunity to publicly comment on this critical construction proposal. This is a critical habitat wildlife corridor and greenbelt area that begs the County for protection. Beyond that, the housing density of the project and creek setbacks are not only completely out of characteristic for the neighborhood, but they infringe on this critical habitat and appear to have been erroneously made. Upper Grayson Creek is an important waterway for species based on its uniqueness as the only year-around running creek from east Briones and how it has proven to be an oasis for an incredibly diverse number of bird and mammal species that use the wildlife corridor. This habitat warrants the fullest of protections that the County can allow. Sincerely, Patrick & Mary King 2001 Mohawk Drive Pleasant Hill 925-935-5464 RE: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Raj Pandher <rpan510@gmail.com> Sun 5/1/2022 11:37 AM To:Joseph Lawlor <Joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us> Hello, I am the property owner of 1052 Grayson Rd. I received the notice of new development adjacent to my property, along with the information that 83 code-protected trees will be removed. There is a large oak tree very close to my property line, that provides valuable shade and privacy for my property - how can I find out if this tree will be removed? Thanks, Raj April 24, 2023 Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Community Development Division Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us Re: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, County File #CDSD20-09531 Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (Revised) Comments submitted via email Dear Mr. Lawlor, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project and revised mitigated negative declaration (MND). As you are aware from previous communications, my mother Jeanne Shikany lives on Iroquois Drive in the neighborhood south of this project, and will be impacted by elements of the project such as noise, traffic, and the loss of the rural character her neighborhood and surrounding area enjoys. I write on her behalf, as well as my own. In addition to impacting the Mohawk and Iroquois Drive neighborhood, the proposed project will have both local and regional natural resource impacts, including but not limited to wildlife, habitat, and water quality impacts. Please be informed that in an email dated May 8, 2022, that I wrote on behalf of my mother and myself, I speciﬁcally requested that she be notiﬁed of any activities regarding this project. While I was notiﬁed by mail, she never received any notiﬁcation from the County. The County is required to provide adequate notice to anyone requesting it, and failed to do so in the case of my mother. Further, the MND that is published for public review is incomplete. It lacks copies of the various reports prepared to address the impacts of this project, including the addendum to the previous biological assessment, thereby limiting the public’s ability to review and comment on the project and the MND. While I am aware the public can request copies of these reports, that does not excuse the County from fulﬁlling their legal responsibility to properly circulate a complete MND that includes supporting documentation in order to facilitate meaningful public and agency input. The County previously considered a proposal to develop this property during approximately 2007 to 2009. The proposal was brought forward by the previous property owners, the children of the the longtime property owners who had passed away. Their goal, according to letters they provided to the neighbors notifying them of their proposed project, was to create lots consistent with the neighborhood while promoting privacy by limiting adjoining rear yards with existing neighbors and minimizing tree removal. They originally proposed creation of six lots, but reduced that number to ﬁve to reduce impacts to the riparian habitat and to allow sufficient area for tree replacement. The previous property owners had the courtesy to reach out to the owners of neighboring properties about their development plans at least twice, and apparently considered neighborhood concerns, the community character, and habitat values in their development proposal which proposed a much more reasonable density than what is currently be proposed. The developer of the current project has not contacted any of the neighbors regarding his plans to my knowledge. This lack of communication is particularly unsavory due to the fact Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 2 18 that compared to the previous project, the current project includes twice the number of lots; includes setback waivers, lot size waivers, and a moderate income home, all for the purpose of facilitating a maximum density development on a lot that contains substantial sensitive habitat and wildlife; is completely out of character for the surrounding area; and results in signiﬁcantly more tree and habitat removal with no area for tree replacement and habitat restoration despite the requirement to replace all removed trees. Although neighborhood outreach may not be speciﬁcally required, it is certainly the courteous and honorable thing to do when undertaking a project of this size and with the signiﬁcant impacts of this project. The developer is well aware by now that the neighbors have legitimate concerns, yet he still chose to conduct no outreach. It appears that there are no changes to the design of this project from the initial MND circulation, and that neighborhood concerns regarding the project design have been ignored or dismissed. While mitigation has been added to address temporary construction impacts to Grayson Creek, water quality, and wildlife, the longterm impacts to sensitive habitats and the wildlife that currently utilizes them remain virtually ignored and unmitigated in the MND. In fact, mitigation measures that would have provided at least some longterm protection to Grayson Creek through riparian corridor fencing and a deed restriction prohibiting development, have been removed from the MND. Concerns about lack of sidewalks and pedestrian safety on Grayson Road due to the density of this development remain. I continue to have concerns about the project and the project MND, as provided in my comments that follow. You will see many of the concerns I expressed in my previous MND comments are repeated here, as they continue to be relevant and were unfortunately not addressed by the current MND. Project Description The concept of a vesting tentative should be explained in the project description so the public understands the advantage the developer is receiving from the county, and what he should provide in return for being granted this advantage; this is a land use issue. The developer is receiving the beneﬁt of a vested right to proceed with the subdivision in substantial compliance with the regulations in effect at the time the project is deemed complete by the county; this protects the developer from potential future changes in regulations. In exchange for this protection, the developer should be required to provide additional details for the project, such as ﬂoor plans, elevations, architectural plans; landscaping plans; parking details; and so forth for all units, including accessory dwelling units. It does not appear that this vesting tentative map goes beyond what would normally be required for a tentative map and environmental review, and there do not appear to be any speciﬁc requirements for vesting tentative maps in the County’s subdivision regulations. The beneﬁts the developer is receiving associated with a vesting tentative map should be clearly described, as should the additional plan requirements for being granted the privilege of a vesting tentative map. If there are no requirements beyond those of a regular tentative map, the county should justify why the development is being granted the privilege of a vesting tentative map. The project description provided at the beginning of the MND lacks sufficient detail to serve as the basis for addressing potential project impacts. The MND instead relies on sections of what should be a single project description that are provided in the analysis sections. While project details are included in the MND discussion sections, the project description at the beginning of this MND should include all project details sufficient to analyze the project, as it provides the basis for environmental review and approval of the project. There are also details missing from the MND analysis discussions serving as a fragmented project description. For example, if accessory dwelling units are included in the project, they Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 3 18 should be included in the project description, and all environmental impact assessments should consider the extra impact burden resulting from the additional dwellings. The MND does not state the distance from the creek to the riparian corridor setback, nor does it describe the width of the riparian corridor that was previously proposed to be protected (previous mitigation measures providing protection are missing.) The project description does not mention the waiver of setback for retaining walls included in the land use section, and nowhere in the MND is the location of the retaining wall mentioned or shown on any project plans. The project plans lack labels for many of the lines shown, including the top of bank and the centerline of the creek channel which should be clearly labeled. This is just some of the missing information. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The site and area description is extremely lacking, as it makes no mention of the riparian, oak woodland, and other protected habitat and vegetation that exists throughout the project site, nor does it mention the wildlife that utilizes the site. Again, while this information is provided in the analysis sections, it should be included in the project description. The description of the surrounding area as representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County is vague and inaccurate. The area immediately surrounding the subject project site on the south side of Grayson Road in the County is very different from development across Grayson Road in Pleasant Hill. The surrounding area must be accurately characterized. This dense development with extremely large homes may be similar to development that is occurring in Pleasant Hill, but is not consistent with the area of the County within which it is proposed. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required This project will require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, yet neither of these agencies are listed here as they should be. 1. AESTHETICS c) While this area may be considered urbanized by the Census Bureau, the visual character of the area is still relatively rural, with signiﬁcant tree cover and larger lots. The proposed reduction in lot width, size, and setbacks combined with the proposed very large homes, relatively small developable area on each lot, and signiﬁcant lot coverage proposed for this subdivision (over 1 acre) will result in a development that is deﬁnitely not in keeping with the immediate surrounding area. As shown on sheet 7 of the project plans, the usable area of many of these lots is no more than approximately half the lot, and in the case of Lots 3, 4 and 5 may be less than half the listed lot size in Table 1 in the LAND USE section. Thus, considering just the lot size when determining aesthetic impacts is misleading. The limited developable area on each of these lots, combined with the setback waivers, results in a subdivision with the density and appearance of the newer dense subdivisions with large homes being built in Pleasant Hill. This circumstance is not appropriate for this general location. The ﬁnding that this residential project is consistent with other residential development immediately surrounding this project is not correct, and cannot be supported with the proposed exceptions to lot width, size and setbacks, and minimal developable area on each lot. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 4 18 In order to not degrade the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings while still allowing for residential development, the density of the development must be reduced. Lot size, width, and setback waivers could then be eliminated, and increased setbacks from the creek to the proposed residential development could be accomplished, all of which is particularly important in light of the size of the proposed homes. In addition, if a landscaping plan is relied on to make the less than signiﬁcant ﬁnding for aesthetics, what measurable performance standards are proposed for landscaping to ensure a less than signiﬁcant impact to aesthetics, particularly since there will not be adequate room on any of the lots to replace the 158 trees to be removed. The requirement for “adequate planting of trees and other landscaping” is not a measurable performance standard, and is relatively meaningless without a clear and detailed deﬁnition of “adequate”. Aesthetics 1: As I mentioned in my previous comments, this mitigation measure makes no mention of ensuring new lighting does not impact the riparian area. The measure states that light will be contained within the project site, but the riparian area is within the project site. Performance standards should specify lighting shall not be allowed to impact the creek and riparian corridor, and shall be fully contained horizontally and vertically within the developed portion of the project. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The biological assessment report was completed in May 2021 and updated in February 2022, according to the initial study. The report states the ﬁeld work was conducted in April of 2021. The initial study further states that an addendum to the biological report was prepared in November of 2022. Unfortunately, no reports, including the addendum to the biological assessment, were attached to the MND, resulting in the MND being incomplete and thus restricting the public’s ability to comment on the ﬁndings. Further, there is no discussion regarding what public agencies with jurisdiction over potentially impacted resources were consulted about this project prior to completion of the initial study with the exception of CDFW, and what their comments were. a) This project has the potential to have a signiﬁcant adverse effect through both temporary construction impacts, permanent habitat loss, and ongoing disturbance from proposed residences. All mitigation currently proposed is to mitigate temporary construction impacts to sensitive habitats, plants and wildlife. There is no discussion of the potential permanent adverse impacts that will result from the virtually complete removal of habitat from everywhere on the property except the riparian corridor, including the removal of some trees whose canopies are located in the riparian corridor, and the introduction of residential uses that will preclude reestablishment of the habitat. There is no analysis of the impacts of noise, lights, and other residential activities on what habitat and wildlife will remain, as well as on reestablishment of destroyed habitat (for example, residential uses leave no room for replanting of removed trees.) There is no analysis or mitigation to address likely intrusions by residents into the riparian corridor that would be facilitated by the close proximity of proposed homes with shallow rear yards to the riparian corridor. A thorough analysis of ongoing residential impacts must be provided. The habitat types listed add up to 2.61 acres, yet the project site is listed as 3.05 acres. What is occurring on the missing 0.44 acres? Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 5 18 Biology 1: This mitigation measure requires compensatory mitigation and avoidance and minimization measures to be implemented to avoid impacts to rare plants. How will avoidance be implemented if sensitive plants are found in the portions of the site to be developed? What is proposed to be done with salvaged seed or root stock since virtually all of this site outside the riparian corridor will be developed with a road, homes, or urban landscaping? Is all compensatory vegetation replacement for sensitive plants and all trees to be removed to occur in the riparian corridor? If so, this is not appropriate. Biology 2: This mitigation measure calls for replacement of on-site riparian woodland to the greatest extent practicable, and on-site replacement of valley oak woodland. What determines what is or is not practicable? Will the developer be allowed to argue that it is not practicable to replace any of the trees, or half of the trees? There should be no nebulous language when calling for replacement of riparian woodland and native trees. Further, rather than allowing for the unilateral removal of riparian and valley oak woodland and native trees to accommodate this excessively dense and hardscaped development, this mitigation measure should call for avoidance of removing this valuable habitat by removing several lots from this development. Subdivision is a privilege, not a right, and the County is not obligated to allow this extreme density and destruction of this valuable habitat, yet it appears there was no consideration of avoidance to minimize the impact to these valuable habitats. CEQA requires avoidance as the ﬁrst step in mitigating impacts. Further, where are the 158 trees to be replaced going to be planted? This site will be 100% developed with residential urban uses (roads, homes, driveways, yards), with the exception of the riparian corridor which already has trees and other vegetation that should not be further disturbed. If extensive replanting of some of these trees is to occur in the riparian corridor, that is itself an impact that must be addressed and mitigation measures to minimize disturbance to this habitat provided. Perhaps a few replacement trees can be planted in the riparian corridor, namely the native trees removed from the riparian woodland, but overall there is no room on this developed site for all the replacement trees. Will they be placed in the front, back and side yards of the lots being created? This would provide minimal area for planting since much of the area of these lots is within the riparian corridor, and front and side setback reductions are proposed, leaving very little yard area, which guarantees any trees planted in yards will stand a strong chance of being removed in the future once homeowners want to landscape. Further, most if not all the trees that must be replanted will get quite large, and are not the kind of trees that homeowners want directly adjacent to their homes. If this mitigation measure is not achievable, it will not mitigate the impact to these valuable habitats that are being removed as well as the wildlife that utilizes these habitats. This mitigation measure does not appear to be achievable given the lack of area to replant trees that will actually grow to maturity and provide the habitat value they currently provide. Additionally, even if some of the trees reach maturity, they will take many years to get large enough to provide any sort of wildlife beneﬁt, and they will not be located in a large contiguous location necessary to reestablish the lost habitat. The analysis of the impact of removing all of these trees must analyze and document where the replacement trees can be planted in a manner that they can actually and reasonably ﬁt with proper spacing and without impacting existing habitat, that they will be protected from removal and retained in place, and that they will provide the habitat value lost by removing the existing trees in a reasonable amount of time, even in light of the activities and impacts associated with Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 6 18 residential uses. This does not seem achievable considering the density and design of this subdivision. While some performance standards have been included in this mitigation measure, this measure must specify: 1) where exactly these trees should be planted so future homeowners can landscape their yards, which they most certainly will want to do and will do, and lost habitat is fully restored; 2) what happens if the trees die within a speciﬁed period of time (i.e. how and when will they be replaced and who will replace them); 3) plant size and other requirements are prescribed for oak woodland trees, but it is unclear whether these requirements also apply to riparian woodland trees; speciﬁc size and standards should be provided for all trees; 4) a requirement that all replacement trees must be from a seed source native to the area; 5) safeguards to insure the new trees are not removed by a future homeowner since they will initially be small and not qualiﬁed as a protected tree unless a mitigation measure speciﬁes them as such, and since removal in the future even with a permit would be contrary to required mitigation; and ﬁnally, 5) how all of this will be monitored. As proposed, this mitigation measure still does not reduce the impact of this tree removal below a threshold of signiﬁcance, even considering other proposed mitigation measures. Biology 4 and 5: This mitigation measure lacks performance standards specifying what is required if pond turtles are found. While mitigation measure Biology 5 mentions exclusion fencing to mitigate impacts to western pond turtles, it speciﬁes amphibians but does not specify reptiles when referring to site monitoring and what must occur if special status reptiles (whip snake and pond turtles) are found. These mitigation measures should be rewritten to be very clear about what must occur regarding special status amphibians and reptiles. Biology 7: This measure requires replanting of undeveloped areas with oak woodland species. However, the only undeveloped areas on this property will be the riparian corridor where no development is allowed and where native riparian species already exist. Is this measure proposing to establish oak woodland in the riparian woodland, which would clearly be inappropriate? Again, there are no undeveloped areas (yards should be considered developed) in this subdivision outside the riparian corridor. In order to fulﬁll this mitigation measure and reestablish oak woodland, several lots must be removed. b) It has been reported by adjoining neighbors that tree cutting resulting in creek and riparian corridor impacts, including deposition of debris in the creek channel, occurred relatively recently and during the time the developer was working on permitting this subdivision. The arborist report was prepared in May of 2020, before the tree removal occurred, and thus does not document the removal. It does not appear that the biological report or the MND reveal this presumably unpermitted tree cutting. Was the loss of habitat that would likely have resulted from tree removal considered to be the baseline for the identiﬁcation of impacts when the biological report was updated in February 2022 and again in November 2022? It is doubtful this is the case since the tree removal is not mentioned in the MND, despite the County being made aware of it in comments on the prior MND. This tree removal occurred pre-project approval and clearly in anticipation of the project. CEQA requires that this early tree removal must be included as part of the MND analysis. Further, appropriate violations must be issued if trees were in fact removed without a permit, and mitigation for the loss of these trees must be required. The developer cannot be allowed to Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 7 18 reduce his mitigation burden by preemptively removing trees. Further, the County cannot further the notion that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than to get permission. Project plans indicate a number of trees whose individual canopies, or canopy cluster the trees are part of, extend into the riparian corridor and are being removed The trees to be removed include at a minimum tree 114, 115, 116, 135, 136, 169, 169b, 170, 171b, 194, and 195, the majority of which are oaks. Some of these trees, along with many others, are identiﬁed for removal because they are in the grading limits. Can they not be retained with minor modiﬁcations to grading, as recommended for trees 137 and 138 in the arborist report? How will the arborist recommendations for trees 137 and 138 be enforced? There seems to be no attempt to avoid tree removal, contrary to CEQA mitigation requirements. The MND contains no description of how the riparian setback was established, and no description of the width of the riparian setback from the creek channel, centerline, or from the top-of-bank. Neither the creek centerline nor the top-of-bank are shown on the development plans (or perhaps they are just not labeled). As shown on Figure 11 in the biological report, in some locations the top-of-bank is either commensurate with or extends beyond the riparian setback, which apparently is the drip line of the trees that were determined to comprise the northerly boundary of the riparian corridor. Policy 8.89 of the general plan Conservation Element requires a minimum 50-ft. setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek. How does the proposed riparian setback compare to the minimum 50- ft. setback? The MND needs to clarify the difference between the riparian setback area and the creek structure setback line, and what can occur within each area. Project plans show the limit of the riparian area with a note that no grading will be allowed. Beyond that line, plans shows the creek structure setback line. It would appear that grading would be allowed within the creek structure setback area outside the riparian setback line, which based on cross- sections, would mean that grading would be allowed up to and below the top of the creek bank which is inappropriate, and therefore demands the extension of the riparian setback area to a point beyond the top of bank. Again, the plans do not clearly show the creek centerline nor the top of bank; this should be remedied to insure the riparian setback area is adequate. It currently does not appear the riparian setback is sufficient to protect Grayson Creek since grading would be allowed beyond the top of bank outside the riparian setback, and tree canopy is being removed within the riparian corridor. Without the riparian setback line extending well beyond the top of bank, which is not what is being proposed, Grayson Creek is left vulnerable to both construction and residential activities. Has the County determined that Grayson Creek, or at least the portion within this subdivision, is a “protected watercourse” due to its signiﬁcant riparian habitat, and thereby requires protection in its natural state pursuant to County Code section 914-4.002, and if not, why not? The MND analyzes how the creek and riparian corridor would be impacted and how those impacts would be mitigated during construction, but is generally silent regarding the impacts associated with the establishment and ongoing activities of permanent residential uses, all of which will occur very close to Grayson Creek. What is not reﬂected in the lot sizes is the fact that the lots include the riparian area, and due to the setback waivers coupled with the number of lots proposed, there is very little rear yard on the majority of the lots, thus encouraging use of the riparian area as part of these homes backyards. A permanent fence was previously proposed by Mitigation Measure Biology 6 to be installed along the riparian corridor. However, the requirement for a permanent fence is no Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 8 18 longer identiﬁed in a mitigation measure as a requirement of the project. How does the County plan to ensure that future property owners do not extend their backyards into the protected riparian area? This fence was described as “wildlife friendly”, but there was no discussion as to what that meant, how the fence would be maintained and by whom, and how the county would insure future property owners do not remove the fence. It appears the riparian setback area is based on the drip line of trees in the riparian corridor, and the line deﬁning the riparian corridor is anything but straight, with many, many small twists and turns. It was therefore unclear as to how a fence was supposed to be constructed along such a line. While these were issues that needed to be addressed regarding this fence, the removal of the fence requirement as a mitigation measure leaves the riparian area vulnerable to development by homeowners as they attempt to extend their rear yards, given the small size of those yards. Why was the fence requirement removed, and how does the county intend to ensure multiple rear yards of the lots in this development do not get extended into the riparian area? The requirement to deed restrict the creek structure setback area provided by previous Mitigation Measure Biology 6 also seems to have been eliminated. The measure stated that the creek structure setback area would be deed restricted, precluding any kind of development, including grading. However, the current MND no longer contains a mitigation measure requiring this deed restriction, yet the project plans still contain a note stating the “developer to relinquish development rights with (sic) creek structure setback area.” Please clarify if this deed restriction is still a requirement and if so, this requirement should be added back into a mitigation measure to ensure the requirement is clear and enforceable. If the deed restriction is no longer required, the MND needs to address this change, explaining why it was removed and how adequate protection for Grayson Creek would still be provided. Based on the design and density of this subdivision, particularly the lack of undeveloped space to accommodate required replanting of oak and riparian woodland, the small rear yards backing up to Grayson Creek, and the lack of mitigation for longterm residential impacts to Grayson Creek and any reestablished habitat, impacts to Grayson Creek and the riparian corridor are not mitigated below a threshold of signiﬁcance. c) Regarding the protection of state and federally protected wetlands, the ﬁnding of less than signiﬁcant impact is based on a number of things. The ﬁnding is partially based on the creation of a riparian setback, which as discussed above in b), does not appear adequate to protect Grayson Creek. The ﬁnding is also based on the creation of a creek structure setback, as required by Mitigation Measure Biology 6 from the previous MND, but no longer included as a mitigation measure in the revised MND, although it is still shown on project plans. It appears this setback area excludes fencing, landscaping, and structures except for drainage structures. However, trees and other vegetation will be removed from the creek structure setback area and grading will apparently be allowed in this setback, including beyond the top of bank along Grayson Creek as noted above. These activities will impact wildlife, the riparian corridor, and the creek by permanently removing valuable habitat, protected trees, and by exposing the crowns of trees remaining that are currently part of a group of trees as well as exposing their root systems to grading impacts. Once these exceptionally large homes are built, with the majority of the lots along the setback having very little backyard, future owners will undoubtedly expand their backyards into the setback area, which is not allowed. How will this expansion be prevented? I doubt the county will monitor the situation, and the backyards are not visible form the street, so Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 9 18 how does the public have conﬁdence that the setback area will be left undeveloped and natural as required? Sheet 4 of the development plans provides some information as to how the creek structure setback was calculated. It appears that only one cross-section was provided at the east end of Grayson Creek with six cross-sections on the westerly end. There are no cross- sections in the middle of this stretch of creek. What was the basis for the location of the cross-sections? How was the number and location of cross-sections determined to be adequate for the establishment of the structure setback lines? How was it determined that the entire creek section is adequately represented by these cross-sections? Regarding structure setback lines, County Code section 914-14.012(d) states that where signiﬁcant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required by section (c) of this same section (the limits the subdivision utilizes), the county may extend the setback line to include such areas. What was the basis for not requiring this additional area, given the number of oaks and other trees that are proposed to be removed, particularly since the trees being removed have crowns that are part of the riparian canopy? d) The revised MND properly notes the Grayson Creek riparian area serves a a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursery sites. It does not appear to acknowledge that the oak woodland that will be completely destroyed provides nesting habitat for migrating birds. Undoubtedly other creatures utilize and pass through this property. How will the virtually complete removal of existing habitat everywhere on this site, except the relatively narrow riparian corridor, to be replaced with development of residences and their associated disruptive activities leaving no room to replant destroyed trees, not impede use of wildlife corridors and nursery sites currently located on this property? Is the 0.8 acres of riparian corridor that will remain and have residential uses directly adjacent to it sufficient to address all current wildlife migration and nursery use on the property, considering the signiﬁcant loss of oak woodland? Missing from this discussion is identiﬁcation of the connectivity of Grayson Creek with offsite portions of the watercourse and habitats, particularly in regard to ﬁsh passage. This is not an isolated section of a creek or habitat, as demonstrated by its use by ﬁsh and local wildlife. The County was provided with helpful information in this regard by a property owner who commented on the ﬁrst MND. This information must be provided in the MND, and it must be demonstrated that loss of a signiﬁcant amount of habitat that has no location on the developed site to be replaced, coupled with the introduction of residential uses, will not interfere with wildlife movement through and use of this property. The MND discussion cites Mitigation Measure Biology 2 through 6 as mitigation for impacts to the use of this property as a wildlife corridor and nursery sites. It is speciﬁcally noted that these measures call for tree replacement; however, this requirement is unachievable since there is no undeveloped area where 158 trees can be replanted and grow to maturity in a manner that will provide lost habitat. The MND discussion also states that post- construction measures for protection of the riparian are included in these measures, but in fact no such measures are provided. The previous MND required fencing along the riparian boundary and a deed restriction of the creek structure setback area prohibiting development. Those mitigation measures have been removed from the project. The conclusion that the project poses a less than signiﬁcant impact to the movement of wildlife is not fully supported and remains potentially signiﬁcant. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 10 18 e) This discussion makes no mention of CEQA section 21083.4 regarding the protection and mitigation of impacts to oak woodland. There is a signiﬁcant area of oak woodland, in addition to mixed woodland on this site. CEQA impacts relative to this section of the CEQA statutes should be addressed. General Plan Policy 8-6 requires signiﬁcant trees, natural vegetation and wildlife populations generally shall be preserved. The discussion states multiple trees on the property will be preserved. According to the arborist report, there are 117 trees greater than 6 inches in diameter on the project site, and 84 of these trees (72%) will be removed, with three additional trees removed prior to the arborist inventory. Of the remaining trees, 17 will be subjected to dripline encroachment during grading, and thus put at risk. Only 16 trees will remain that would not be at risk during site grading. Thus, it is clear that this project does not preserve “signiﬁcant trees and vegetation”. Further, replacement of all of these trees is impossible since there is no undeveloped area outside the riparian corridor where they can be planted and be expected to mature in a manner that will reestablish lost habitat. General Plan Policy 8-12 requires natural woodlands shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible in the course of land development. Replacement of trees to be removed from the site does not constitute compliance with this policy, particularly since virtually all of the 1.2 acres of oak woodland, 0.2 acres of mixed woodland, and 0.2 acres of the 1 acre of riparian habitat that currently exists on the site will be completely destroyed, with no location outside the riparian woodland corridor that will remain undeveloped where this habitat can be reestablished. Having a random remaining tree, or planting an oak here and there, does not constitute reestablishment of these woodland habitats. The only way to come close to mitigating the impact of this development is to reduce the number of lots by at least half. As currently proposed, not only does this project violate the general plan, its impacts to these woodland habitats remain signiﬁcant and unmitigated. The above are just two of the general plan policies that the project does not comply with. In general, many of the policies listed in the MND call for the preservation of natural vegetation and wildlife areas, which is not what is proposed for this project. While most of the riparian corridor will remain intact, a portion of the riparian woodland and all of the oak and mixed woodland will be destroyed. Grading will occur over the top of bank of Grayson Creek. Rear yards are extremely small for most of the lots along the creek and are located in very close proximity to the riparian boundary, with no post-construction mitigation measures proposed. Reestablishment of the habitats to be removed is not possible given that there will be no undeveloped land upon which to replant trees and reestablish lost habitat. Thus, the mitigation measure calling for replanting of trees cited to demonstrate compliance with some of these policies cannot be implemented and is therefore not mitigation for the signiﬁcant impact that will occur to natural habitats on this property. This project is, for the most part, not in compliance with these general plan policies. As mentioned previously, trees have reportedly already been removed from this property, undoubtedly in anticipation of this project. There is no discussion about this removal, including whether or not the number of trees to be removed as part of the project include the trees already removed, or is in addition to those trees. Was a permit obtained for this removal? What are the ﬁndings that were made made to support removal of these protected trees? As mentioned above, if trees were previously removed, they must be documented and any prescribed mitigation must apply to their removal. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 11 18 One of the reasons tree removal can be approved according the county code is “reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot.” Subdivision is a privilege, not a right, so what determines “reasonable development”? It is certainly not synonymous with “maximum development”, yet that appears to be the standard applied here. This project could certainly be redesigned to avoid such extensive tree and habitat removal, including creating fewer lots and a larger riparian corridor/open space area, and requiring smaller development footprints as part of the vesting tentative map approval. CEQA requires avoidance of environmental impacts as a ﬁrst step, yet there seems to be no consideration or discussion of how removal of these trees and habitat could be avoided, nor any justiﬁcation provided for their removal. The fact that a property owner does not have a right to subdivide, combined with CEQA’s requirement for impact avoidance where feasible, and considering the other impacts of this project, would point to the need to signiﬁcantly reduce the density of this development. 6. ENERGY a) As mentioned in my previous comments, a less than signiﬁcant ﬁnding for this section is partially supported by a statement that the “project is located in an urban residential neighborhood, within walking distance of a commercial district, and within biking distance of the Pleasant Hill Bart Station. The close proximity to these amenities could reduce the automobile trip generation from the project; thus, reducing energy consumption.” This statement neglects to recognize that ﬁrst, this is not a typical urban neighborhood with fully developed sidewalks and bike lanes. In fact, sidewalks are missing along much of Grayson Road, and walking on Grayson is dangerous given the excessive speed at which traffic travels on this road. Also, are there bike lanes to safely travel from the subdivision to the Pleasant Hill Bart Station? Second, the county is inappropriately giving the developer a waiver on constructing sidewalks in his Grayson Road frontage despite the fact that the subdivision will add to the need for sidewalks considering its density, further insuring there will likely never be completed sidewalks along this road or if there are sidewalks added in the future, they will be unjustiﬁably installed at taxpayer expense. The claim that a commercial district is within walking distance of this subdivision and that this will save energy is disingenuous under these circumstances. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS g) As provided in my comments under WILDFIRE, the ﬁre risk for this subdivision is higher than a standard urbanized area. There is a signiﬁcant amount of vegetation including trees, shrubs, and grassland in and around this area. There are also overhead power lines, which together with the natural vegetation, pose a ﬁre risk. Will power lines be placed underground in the subdivision? I could not locate this information on the plans, not to say it is not there. Even if they are to be placed underground, there are overhead lines in the area surrounding the subdivision that together with the surrounding vegetation, pose a ﬁre risk to this subdivision that exceeds risks of typical urban subdivisions. The vegetation in and around this subdivision that is atypical of areas most people consider urbanized, coupled with the the proposed large homes virtually on top of each other given the proposal for reduced side yard setbacks as well as homes adjacent to a wooded area, Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 12 18 serves to provide a ﬁre risk that is higher than typical urban areas. If one home catches ﬁre, it is highly likely that neighboring homes will, as well. Further, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced due to vegetation removal is potentially very telling as to the County’s commitment (or lack thereof) to reestablishing habitats that will be removed from this project. The project calls for replanting of all trees on the project site, many at a 3:1 ratio. Is this requirement just smoke and mirrors, and is the County actually envisioning a permanent removal of all of the vegetation (i.e. sensitive habitats)? As previously noted, it is unclear where all the trees to be replanted could possibly be located given the lack of undeveloped area remaining on the project site outside the riparian corridor. However, if the goal or replanting lost trees and habitat can be met per mitigation requirements, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced as a result of vegetation removal is incorrect and in direct conﬂict with the requirement to replant this vegetation. Finally, this section seems to ignore the increased ﬁre risk to all of the County brought about by climate change, and the risk that continues to increase with hotter temperatures, ongoing drought, and increasing population density not appropriate. 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY b) While wells will not be required to serve this subdivision, this project will interfere with groundwater supplies and recharge, given the extent of over 1 acre of impermeable surface being proposed, and with the direction of stormwater runoff from impermeable surfaces into the storm drain system. The MND claims that the treatment planter (detention basin) would maintain existing groundwater recharging, yet the MND states that the ﬂowthrough treatment planter will treat water from impervious surfaces prior to connecting to the public storm drain system. This water would therefore not contribute to the groundwater recharge process currently occurring on the site, contrary to what the MND claims. Further, I would suspect the project could also impact the amount of runoff that feeds Grayson Creek, but there is no analysis of this potential impact, which should be provided. This discussion does not support a ﬁnding of less than signiﬁcant impact, and is actually completely irrelevant to the question. c) Section ii claims that the project will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff. The project proposes a signiﬁcant amount of impervious surface compared to what currently exists, resulting in a substantial increase in runoff compared to current conditions, as well as a change in drainage pattern since runoff with be channeled into the storm drain system. This may not result in ﬂooding as this section concludes, but the basis for the claim is erroneous. 11. LAND USE PLANNING b) In the official density determination for this project, the County used 2.99 dwelling units per acre rather than 2.9 as stated in the MND, resulting in 8.28 units per acre, rounded to 9 base units for this subdivision. The calculation was based on a net acreage of 2.76, which was calculated by subtracting the private right of way proposed for this project from the total project site acreage. Table 3-4 of the county’s general plan Land Use Element states that “net acreage includes all land area used exclusively for residential purposes, and excludes streets, highways, and all other public rights-of-way. Net acreage is assumed to constitute 75 percent of gross Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 13 18 acreage for all uses, except for the Multi-Family designations, where it is assumed to comprise 80 percent.” Considering this deﬁnition, the county’s “conservative” density calculation appears to be quite the opposite. For example, a more conservative estimate would be based on 75% of the 3.05 gross project acreage, which results in 2.29 net acres, multiplied by 2.99 is 6.85 which rounds up to 7 base units, rather than 9 as the county is proposing. One moderate unit would be 15% of 7 base units qualifying for a 10% bonus, which would allow one additional unit for a total of 8, two lots less than what is being proposed, although still too dense for this site. However, in this case, based on the deﬁnition of net acreage, there are at least two areas that should be removed from the net acreage calculation, 0.29 acres for the street and 1.5 deed restricted acres for the Grayson Creek structure setback area where no development would be allowed. Previous Mitigation Measure Biology 7 required that the creek structure setback area be protected from development via a permanent deed restriction and dedication of development rights to the County. (This mitigation measure has been removed from the MND, but the project plans still contain a note that the area will be deed restricted. The mitigation measure should be added back into the MND.) These two areas are therefore clearly excluded from use for residential purposes, and cannot be included in the net acreage for the project. Subtracting the 1.5 acre creek setback area as described in the previous MND (the setback acreage is not included in the current MND) and the subdivision roadway results in a net acreage of 1.26, which when multiplied by 2.99 maximum allowed density, results in 3.77 or 4 base units when rounded. One moderate unit divided by the base units equals 25%, allowing for a 20% density bonus, multiplied by 4 base units equals 4.8, allowing one additional unit for a total of 5 units, a more reasonable density for this project. Limiting this project to no more than 5 lots would allow either larger lots with the required setbacks more in keeping with the surrounding area and would allow signiﬁcantly more trees to be retained as well as more area for trees to be replanted, or it would allow a larger riparian corridor with lots perhaps remaining a bit smaller and clustered closer to Grayson Road, again allowing more trees to remain and offering additional protection for Grayson Creek. This approach would also be consistent with the County’s general plan Chapter 3 Land Use Element, where the description of the land use designation Single-Family Residential-Low Density states that unique environmental characteristics of a parcel may justify larger lot sizes. Requested waivers should be revisited using what should be the correct calculation for the number of allowed lots in this project by removing the roadway and the creek structure setback area. The waiver of lot width with the number of lots currently proposed creates lot widths completely inconsistent with the area immediately surrounding this property. It also reduces the area where 158 trees will need to be replanted and retained because they are mitigation and therefore cannot ever be removed. With the reduced lot size, lot width, and lot setbacks, there is no room to plant trees that will grow quite large. The waiver of curb, gutter and sidewalk poses a safety concern when considering 10 lots, as discussed in the Transportation section, and would be a more reasonably accommodated for only 5 lots. The waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls needs to be explained; what is the waiver being requested, why is it being requested, and where is the retaining wall? Compliance with things such as lot size and setbacks can be waived if compliance would prohibit creation of the affordable lot pursuant to state housing law. Lot width and size requirements are being waived in this case. However, it appears that even without the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 14 18 affordable lot, nine lots would still result in substandard lot sizes, widths, and setbacks. Therefore, nine lots should not be considered as the baseline since they could not be constructed without the granting of variances, which would be illegal since the need for them would be self-created. Further, the ﬁnding that the affordable lot is driving the need for these waivers from development standards cannot be made since the nine base lots would require the same waiver. Please provide an explanation as to how the County is making the ﬁnding that it is the affordable lot that is driving the need for the development standards waivers, and how a ﬁnding that nine lots is the base number allowed given that they would require development standard waivers, which would require the illegal granting of variances. Also, please explain how it was determined that housing law waivers apply to all lots, and not just the affordable lot. Granting of a concession is contingent on the requirement that no impacts to the public health or safety result. Clearly the waiver of sidewalk requirements for a 10-lot subdivision on a busy and dangerous street would negatively impact the public health and safety, particularly when the CEQA document identiﬁes the ability to walk to services as a characteristic of the subdivision, and that this characteristic will reduce energy use. Please explain how the County intends to make the ﬁnding that excusing the developer from constructing sidewalks on his Grayson frontage will not impact the public health and safety. It seems very clear that one moderate income unit is included in this development strictly for the purpose of maximizing the density of this subdivision through waivers of development standards and avoidance of subdivision construction requirements (frontage improvements) pursuant to state housing law, and not for the purpose of providing affordable housing. The affordable unit is in the worst location and is the smallest lot and home in the subdivision, and will clearly reveal itself in the subdivision as a home for lower income people. Waivers and concessions are meant to facilitate the creation of affordable housing, not facilitate increased density of high end housing. This circumstance should not be acceptable to the County, and is certainly not beneﬁtting the greater public good. Also, has the county received documentation showing that the requested incentives and waivers are ﬁnancially necessary to construct the one moderate affordable home? This information should included in the MND land use analysis. Finally, It is clear that the county’s interpretation of housing law is resulting in a subdivision with signiﬁcant unmitigated impacts to public trust resources, as well as impacts resulting from a development completely out of character with its surroundings, due to its extremely high density. Does housing law allow development of projects with signiﬁcant impacts to public trust resources for the purpose of including one affordable unit? These impacts would certainly impact the public’s health and safety which is not allowed by housing law. Maintaining healthy ecosystems translates to health beneﬁts for not just the natural environment but for humans as well, and conversely, impacts to natural and human ecosystems is detrimental to the natural and human environment and inhabitants. How does the county intend to address the health and safety impacts, which are contrary to housing law, that will result from the density proposed for this subdivision? The lot area shown on Table 1 listed without also including developable area for each lot is misleading. As shown on sheet 7 of the project plans, the usable area of many of these lots is no more than approximately half the lot, and in the case of Lots 3, 4 and 5 may be less than half the listed lot size. The limited developable area on each of these lots, combined with the setback waivers, results in a subdivision with the density and appearance of the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 15 18 newer dense subdivisions being built in Pleasant Hill, which is not appropriate for this general location, and in particular for this property. Consideration must be given to the the signiﬁcant number of waivers requested by the applicant. The substantial ﬁnancial value of those waivers to the applicant that will be realized via increased density and a waiver of sidewalks on Grayson, must be weighed against the cost of those waivers to the public via resource impacts, loss of a required frontage improvements, increased traffic impacts, the addition of one moderate income home, and so forth. The waivers are likely worth tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars and will burden taxpayers with future costs, all for the small public beneﬁt of a single moderate income home, the smallest home on the smallest lot in the worst location in the subdivision. The granting of these waivers is not in the public interest, and should be limited or denied. 13. NOISE b)While the addition of mitigation measure Noise 1 is a positive step, some edits to this measure would be appropriate. Rather than simply posting a notice on the construction site, which may not be readily accessible by neighbors, the developer or contractor should mail a notice to each nearby resident providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. This is not a difficult thing to accomplish, and should be required by the County. In addition, the hours of operation for noise producing activities are a bit excessive. Noisy activities during the week should end at 6:00 PM. Nobody should have to sit at the dinner table in their homes and listen to construction activities. Saturday activities should be limited to the hours of 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM. This is a quiet residential neighborhood, and noise-generating activities should be limited accordingly. 17. TRANSPORTATION a) The waiver of frontage requirements proposed for this subdivision is short sighted, dangerous, and sets a precedent that will result in either no complete sidewalks on Grayson, or the public having to pay for improvements the developer should have to pay for, when someone gets hit by a speeding car on Grayson. Ten new homes and potentially as many ADUs will contribute additional traffic and pedestrians to an area with speeding traffic and fragmented sidewalks where it is already unsafe to walk, thereby creating a health and safety risk for subdivision pedestrians and adding to the risk for existing pedestrians due to increased traffic on a road with few sidewalks. It is interesting that a sidewalk is proposed within the subdivision, but no sidewalk is proposed on Grayson. The public, both pedestrians and drivers, will be negatively impacted by increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic on Grayson resulting from the proposed subdivision, with no improvements to compensate for the subdivision’s impacts. In the Energy section of the initial study, the claim is made that the project is located within walking distance of a commercial district. However, there are incomplete sidewalks on Grayson, so walking to the commercial district has signiﬁcant safety issues. These safety issues will be exacerbated with the increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic contributed by this subdivision. The MND does not discuss pedestrian impacts resulting from increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and is thus deﬁcient. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 16 18 Complete frontage improvements are standard requirements of subdivisions, and sidewalks are desperately needed on Grayson. With limited existing sidewalk on the south side of Grayson, and also incomplete sidewalk on the north side, the County’s goal should be to gradually provide sidewalks all along Grayson rather than look for ways to help a developer avoid standard improvements to the detriment of the public and the beneﬁt of the developer’s bottom line. Instead of working to achieve the goal of completing Grayson sidewalks, the County supports granting a waiver of frontage improvements for this project because the developer does not want to pay for them, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill in the future. Justiﬁcation for granting of the waiver includes the claim that it would be prohibitively expensive given the length of the frontage, grading, tree removal and utility requirements. The project is already doing signiﬁcant grading, constructing utilities, and removing 97 trees to enable the maximum development of this property with as many large homes as possible, rather then reducing the number of homes to a reasonable density to preserve the valuable habitat on this property, the best option for site development. There does not seem to be an issue with the expense of grading, utilities, and especially tree removal when it directly enables maximum site development, meaning maximum proﬁts, but tree removal all of a sudden becomes too expensive when considering development of frontage improvements? This is not a legitimate reason to not require frontage developments, particularly given the extreme density of this development. Tree removal for a sidewalk could be eliminated with a bit of creativity locating the sidewalk; sidewalks do not need to be straight. A signiﬁcant reduction in the number of subdivision lots could create a situation where frontage improvements may be considered for waiver. Further justiﬁcation for waiving frontage improvements is provided by the statement that there is no sidewalk within 1000 feet of the subdivision to connect to, and adjacent properties that front Grayson are not expected to develop in the future (another example of why the proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the neighborhood), meaning it is not anticipated that these adjacent properties will be required to provide frontage sidewalks in the near future. The County is rationalizing the elimination of sidewalks for this subdivision based on the fact that they would not connect to sidewalks on adjacent properties now or in the near future, so the County sees no point in requiring this subdivision to provide sidewalks now. This is extremely poor planning, as it sets up a scenario where there will never be sidewalks on Grayson unless the public is willing to pay for them, rather than the developer as is the norm when subdivisions are approved. If the lots adjacent to the proposed subdivision were to develop in the future, it is reasonable that they will also ask for and receive a waiver of frontage requirements because they will use the same rationale for which the County is setting precedent, that there will be no sidewalk for them to connect to. They will also claim expense, and so forth, again a precedent being set here by the County. The end result will be the public having to pay for sidewalks that are desperately needed along Grayson because the developer does not want to pay for the improvements. If development concessions are to be made in order to provide moderate income housing, the public should get something comparable from the deal in return. However, in this case, it appears the developer and the County are using the inclusion of just one moderate income home, the smallest home in the worst location and on the smallest lot in the subdivision to ultimately place the burden of a future sidewalk on the public, which is unacceptable. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 17 18 MND also justiﬁes the waiver of frontage improvements based on Density Bonus law. The County is required to grant incentives and concessions consistent with this law unless the County makes certain written ﬁndings based on substantial evidence. One of those ﬁndings is that the concession or incentive would have a speciﬁc, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment for which there is no feasible mitigation. The elimination of frontage improvements, most speciﬁcally sidewalk, has an adverse impact on public health and safety as discussed. The MND never analyzes impacts on pedestrian safety, and at the density proposed by this subdivision, there is no way to mitigate the impact caused by waiving frontage requirements. This concession should be denied or alternatively, the subdivision should be redesigned to a lower density in keeping with the rural nature of the surrounding area, thereby decreasing the vehicle and pedestrian contribution to Grayson Road. Regarding the trip generation discussion, the neighborhood has been told that the new homes will include ADUs. If this is the case, then the trip generation, parking needs, and so forth will increase. If ADUs are proposed as part of this development, this circumstance should be described and analyzed in the MND. c) Although the project may not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature speciﬁcally, it will certainly contribute more traffic to Grayson Road. At certain times of the day, it can be challenging to enter Grayson from Mohawk, especially because traffic often travels faster than the speed limit The stopping time may be adequate for 35 mph for the new intersection, but it does not match the reality of the speed on Grayson. Cars have gathered speed by the time they reach Mohawk coming from either direction, and will make entering Grayson from Mohawk that much more challenging. This project will increase traffic risks above the current level for existing homes. 20. WILDFIRE (this section repeats the discussion included in HAZARDS) The ﬁre risk for this subdivision is higher than a standard urbanized area. There is a signiﬁcant amount of vegetation including trees, shrubs, and grassland in and around this area. There are also overhead power lines, which together with the natural vegetation, pose a ﬁre risk. Will power lines be placed underground in the subdivision? I could not locate this information on the plans, not to say it’s not there. Even if they are to be placed underground, there are overhead lines in the area surrounding the subdivision, posing a ﬁre risk to this subdivision that exceeds risks of typical urban subdivisions. The vegetation in and around this subdivision that is atypical of areas most people consider urbanized, coupled with the the proposed large homes virtually on top of each other given the proposal for reduced side yard setbacks as well as home adjacent to a wooded area, serves to provide a ﬁre risk that is higher than typical urban areas. If one home catches ﬁre, it is highly likely that neighboring homes will, as well. Further, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced due to vegetation removal is potentially very telling as to the County’s commitment (or lack thereof) to reestablishing habitats that will be removed from this project. The project calls for replanting of all trees on the project site, many at a 3:1 ratio. Is this requirement not genuine, and is the County instead envisioning a permanent removal of all of the vegetation on this site (i.e. sensitive habitats) outside the riparian area? As previously noted, it is unclear where all the trees to be replanted could possibly be located given the lack of natural area remaining on the project site outside the riparian corridor. However, if the goal of replanting lost trees and habitat can be met per Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 18 18 mitigation requirements, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced as a result of vegetation removal is incorrect and in direct conﬂict with the requirement to replant this vegetation. Finally, this section seems to ignore the increased ﬁre risk to all of the County brought about by climate change, and the risk that continues to increase with hotter temperatures, ongoing drought, and increasing population density not appropriate. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Some project impacts, including but not limited to biological impacts from permanent habitat removal and traffic impacts, and remain potentially signiﬁcant. It is an important reminder to the public and decision makers that the subdivision of a property is a privilege, not a right. The goal of the developer and the County for this development is clear - to force as much density on this property as possible by including one moderate income home, being the smallest home on the smallest lot in the worst location in this subdivision, in order to obtain as many concessions and waivers as possible so a maximum density subdivision can be developed, while disregarding the longterm loss of the sensitive and protected habitat and the health and safety concerns of the community. Previous owners recognized the value of less density when developing this property, but it is clear the current proposal makes no attempt balance development with existing habitat and community values, which is unfortunate and simply not the right thing to do. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my comments. This project has potentially signiﬁcant environmental impacts due to the habitat located on the project site, the number of lots being proposed, and the waivers being requested. All impacts have not been identiﬁed, analyzed, or mitigated below a threshold of signiﬁcance. As suggested in my previous MND comments and by other comments you have received from neighbors in the project area, a signiﬁcant reduction in the number of lots, by at least ﬁfty percent, would be more appropriate for maintaining the existing habitat values on this site and protecting community values and the public interest, while allowing the applicant the privilege of subdividing the property. Sincerely, Lisa D. Shikany 115 Harlan Way Fortuna, CA 95540 ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 12 6x6 concrete boxes under Grayson Creek and discharges water directly to Grayson Creek. Most runoff on the project site would be directed to a 674-cubic-foot bioretention basin located adjacent to Lot 2 for treatment. Once treated, runoff would be directed to the public storm drainpipe beneath Grayson Road. A portion of the runoff would bypass this treatment system and instead enter the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24 -inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff, even in a 100 -year storm event. This would ensure that project runoff would not exceed existing conditions. F. Housing Element Compliance – Residential Sites Inventory: California Government Code Section 65863 mandates that no local government action shall reduce, require or permit the reduction of the residential density, or allow development at a lower residential density for any parcel identified in the sites inventory for the adopted Housing Element, unless the local government makes written findings that the reduction is consistent with the General Plan, and the remaining sites identified in the Housing Element’s site inventory are adequate to meet the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need. As defined by statute, “a lower residential density” refers to allowing fewer units on the site than were projected within the site inventory of the Housing Element. In order to assess whether this residential development application is subject to requirements of California Government Code section 65863, staff reviewed the site inventory for the adopted 2014 Housing Element and determined that Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 are not among the parcels listed in the inventory of residential sites which were relied upon to meet the County’s share of regional housing needs. VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 13 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: the CDFW and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letter were received from individuals. All comments are summarized and responded to below. A. Agency Comments a. California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDFW Comment 1 The comment provides introductory remarks and requests that the previous comment letter be addressed and met as part of the Conditions of Approval for the proposed project by the County. All comments have been addressed and mitigation measures would be included in the project conditions of approval. CDFW Comment 2 CDFW recommends that the project area be surveyed for special-status plants by a qualified Botanist following the “Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities,” (Protocol) which can be found online at Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survfey- Protocols#377281280-plants. Additionally, If State-listed plants, special-status plants, State rare plants found on the CNPS California Rare Plant Ranking system, or plants found on the CNPS East Bay Chapter’s Database of Rare and Unusual Plants are identified during botanical surveys, consultation with the CDFW is warranted to determine whether the proposed project can avoid take. Mitigation Measure Biology 1, would require that in the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys would be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. CDFW Comment 3 ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 14 CDFW summarizes the Revised Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020, and authored by Traverso Tree Service, and states that an analysis of oak natural communities was not provided, and the Revised Arborist Report and IS/MND did not include an assessment of canopy cover and absolute percentages in upland areas or covering the channel of Grayson Creek. CDFW also states that the IS/MND fails to note that this collection of oaks may be identified as Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, based on these initial findings; both of which are Sensitive Natural Communities ranked as State Rank 3 and 4 respectively according to the CDFW’s Natural Communities. Additionally, CDFW identifies that the Mitigation Measure related to replanting did not include a monitoring component, which is inadequate for mitigating the project-related impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities to a level of less than significant. Furthermore, CDFW provides recommendations on how the planting could be implemented to mitigate impacts. The comment does not provide any ecological or other basis for concluding the tree replanting Mitigation Measure is inadequate, or to support the request for additional mitigation for the removal of trees. The BRA Addendum, prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC, dated December 2022, and recirculated IS/MND provide an analysis of project impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities, drawing the conclusion that the proposed project would result in removal of 1.1 acre of Valley Oak Woodland. The revised Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodland in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of- kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with a replacement tree planting plan that shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Though this is not consistent with the CDFW recommendation, the mitigation ratio contained is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice and is supported by the BRA. This implementation includes bonding to ensure that the plantings are viable or replaced. As detailed in the BRA Addendum, the proposed project’s potential impacts to trees and Valley Oak Woodland have been adequately analyzed, adequate mitigation has been identified, and the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to trees. CDFW Comment 4 CDFW states that the initially circulated IS/MND Mitigation Measure Biology 1 requires that nesting bird surveys would be limited to the large trees of the adjacent riparian area from February 15 to August 31, and that this measure fails to avoid ground nesting birds and those that nest in shrubs. CDFW recommended that a revised mitigation measure be incorporated into the revised IS/MND. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 15 Mitigation Measure Biology 3 has been updated based on the BRA Addendum and includes additional survey requirements to protect birds that nest on the ground, in shrubs, and on structures that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. With implementation of this updated mitigation, CDFW’s concerns related to birds would be addressed. CDFW Comment 5 CDFW recommends alternative language to replace Mitigation Measure Biology-4 to mitigate for the permanent impacts to special-status bats and their habitats to a level of less than significant. Mitigation Measure Biology-8 includes the recommended language. CDFW Comment 6 CDFW requires a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq., for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank including associated riparian or wetland resources; or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Based on the Vesting Tentative Map for the proposed project, dated January 28, 2022, and authored by DeBolt Civil Engineering, an LSA Notification under Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. would be a requirement of the proposed project as designed. As stated within the BRA Addendum, as project implementation would result in impacts to CDFW’s Fish and Game Code Sections 1600–1607 jurisdiction, a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) would be required. The project proponent will apply for an LSAA prior to project implementation. CDFW Comment 7 CDFW requests that any special-status species and natural communities detected during project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Any special-status species found to exist at the site during biological surveys or project implementation would be reported to the CNDDB. b. East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) The letter from EBMUD stated the permitting requirements that would apply to the project from the agency. The adequacy of the IS/MND was not questioned. The applicant would adhere to all EBMUD requirements. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 16 B. Public Comments a. Suzanne Francois Francois Comment 1 The comment is concerned about the lack of detail provided about the proposed project. The comment requests more information, such as building specifics, ADU details, riparian setback details, lighting, and more. The comment adds that the project site’s wildlife impact reports are incomplete. The proposed project would not construct ADUs. Details regarding the proposed building and development standards are included in the Land Use and Planning section of the IS/MND. A 50-foot setback from the Creek for protection of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor would be provided, as described in IS/MND Project Description, and as shown in the Vesting Tentative Map for the project. Lighting impacts were analyzed in IS/MND Aesthetics section, which found that new sources of light and glare would originate from internal and external housing lights and car headlights. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1, would require a Lighting Plan that would ensure all lighting is reasonable oriented onto the subject property. Francois Comment 2 The comment states that the description of the neighborhood around the project site is inaccurate. The comment adds that the description of the on-site woodland area is also inaccurate. The comment does not provide specifics as to the inaccuracies of the provided descriptions. All relevant information regarding the surrounding neighborhood and on-site woodland has been included in the IS/MND. Francois Comment 3 The commenter questions how nesting owls residing at the project site will be protected. Mitigation Measure Biology 3 includes pre-construction survey requirements to avoid impacts to nesting birds that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in Project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 17 Francois Comment 4 The comment states that the proposed project is not transparent. The comment questions why Grayson Creek and its habitats are not being protected. The comment on the proposed project’s transparency is not an environmental issue and the project has been discussed in detail and publicly noticed multiple times. Project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor. However, a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring on-site [79 percent of the on-site riparian habitat] would be avoided). Grayson Creek itself would not be impacted by the proposed project. b. Clay Haberman Haberman Comment 1 The comment states that 12-hour noise-inducing activities during the week for the proposed project is excessive. Furthermore, the comment requests that noise- inducing activities for the proposed project be limited on Saturdays to 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The project would include standard conditions of approval that would limit the construction to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Haberman Comment 2 The commenter states that the Arborist Report and tree survey have not been updated since the property owner removed trees and thus, it must be confirmed with a new tree survey that no protected trees were removed. All trees documented in the arborist report have remained as protected trees throughout the review of the project. During project implementation, the removed trees, accidental or planned, would be verified through compliance review of the conditions of approval and would be required to be mitigated as detailed in the conditions. Haberman Comment 3 The comment states that a tree protection plan should be mandated as a condition of approval and that the replacement planting requirements should be quantified based on the original survey prior to the removal of trees. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 18 As required by the conditions of approval, a tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits. Haberman Comment 4 The comment notes that standard parking stalls are 9 feet wide and 19 feet long in the County for residential projects. As such, the comment states that the proposed setback of 14 feet would not be able to accommodate cars on the driveway and should not include the garage. The comment notes that standard parking stalls are 19 feet long, and that cars would not be able to park on the proposed driveways as they would be too short and narrow. The comment further notes that the proposed road would be too narrow to accommodate parallel parking, and therefore residents of the proposed project would have to park on Grayson Road. The comment further states that as such, adequate frontage improvements should be provided to Grayson Road to ensure parking space and pedestrian safety. The proposed project would enforce a 20-foot minimum front yard setback requirement to the face of the two-car garages in each proposed unit. This would exceed the standard parking stall length of 19 feet, and would thus allow for parking of standard-sized vehicles on the driveways. Haberman Comment 5 The comment notes that the proposed project would receive a concession to develop smaller lots as part of the State Density Bonus Law. The comment suggests further decrease to the proposed lot and unit sizes to allow for proper street and driveway improvements. The comment explains that this would result in a reduced burden for adjacent streets and neighbors. The comment suggests smaller lots and homes to allow for wider streets. As explained in the responses above, the IS/MND did not identify any potential circulation hazards that would require additional mitigation. Haberman Comment 6 c. Ann Keeler Keeler Comment 1 The commenter states that there appears to be a flock of band tail pigeons at the property. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 19 Band-tailed pigeons (Patagioenas fasciata) are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Mitigation Measure Biology 3 includes pre-construction survey requirements to avoid impacts to birds protected pursuant to the MBTA that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. d. Lisa Shikany Shikany Comment 1 The comment remarks that they specifically requested for neighbor Jeanne Shikany to be notified of activities pertaining to the proposed project in addition to themselves in an email on May 8, 2022. The comment states that Jeanne Shikany did not receive any notification, and that the County is required to provide adequate notice to anyone requesting it and failed to do so in this case. The project was noticed to the commenter as requested. This is evidenced by the fact that the commenter responded to the notice and is listed on the notification list for the project. Shikany Comment 2 The comment states that the County failed to provide the complete Draft IS/MND for public review, and that copies of the various reports prepared to address the impacts of this proposed project were not available, including the addendum to the previous biological assessment, thereby limiting the public’s ability to review and comment on the proposed project. The IS/MND and all reports were available during the noticing period. The IS/MND was posted on the County’s website and all reports were available upon request. Shikany Comment 3 The comment compares the prior 2007 and 2009 proposal to the proposed project. It states that the 2007 and 2009 proposal better promoted privacy, protected the riparian area, minimized tree removal, and matched the community character with a lower density. Furthermore, the comment notes that the prior project sponsor facilitated better communication with the neighboring residents regarding project concerns and that the current project sponsor has not contacted the neighborhood community. The comment notes that the proposed project contains twice the number of subdivisions, includes setback and lot size waivers and a moderate- ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 20 income home for the purposes of achieving maximum unit density. The comment notes that the project site contains sensitive habitats and wildlife and that the proposed project removes trees and habitats with no space for replacement. The comment also notes that the proposed project is out of character with the surrounding area. The proposed project by design is denser that the previously approved subdivision of the project site. The project has been designed with densities and development standards that are consistent with the State Density Bonus Law as discussed previously. Shikany Comment 4 The comment states that the applicant did not address neighborhood concerns related to design. The applicant has redesigned the project in response to comments from neighbors and CDFW. As detailed in the BRA Addendum, with the updated mitigations, the project is not expected to have a significant impact on the environment. Additionally, the applicant has responded to adjacent neighbor’s requests for privacy fencing and relocation of proposed residences to address privacy concerns. Shikany Comment 5 The comment states the long-term impacts to sensitive habitats and the wildlife that currently utilize them are not addressed in the IS/MND. Specific impacts and mitigation measures have been identified and would be implemented as part of the project. These mitigations have been designed for the specific circumstances of the subject property, including the biological impact mitigations based on the species that could be located on the subject property. Shikany Comment 6 The comment states that the IS/MND does not incorporate mitigation measures such as riparian corridor fencing and a deed restriction prohibiting development, which would have provided long-term protection to Grayson Creek. Mitigation measures for the protection of Grayson Creek have been incorporated into the project. These mitigation measures include the requirement for a Stormwater Control Plan to protect water quality, a lighting plan to limit nighttime light impacts on the creek, and tree planting and landscape plans for restitution/mitigation for removed trees. Though the project does not include the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 21 mitigations requested by the commenter, a less than significant impact is expected as discussed in the IS/MND and supported by the Biological Resources Assessment Addendum. Shikany Comment 7 The comment expresses concern about the lack of sidewalks and pedestrian safety on Grayson Road due to the density of the proposed project. The IS/MND Transportation section describes that the proposed project would generate an additional 8 AM and 8 PM new peak period trips, which was determined to be a less than significant impact on circulation. The proposed project includes a 5-foot-wide, elevated sidewalk along the proposed new roadway. It would also include a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping. The County’s Complete Streets policy requires streets to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right-of-way for each category of users. The IS/MND describes that the proposed project would comply with this requirement. Furthermore, the proposed project qualifies for one exemption or concession from the County pursuant to the Density Bonus Law. The project applicant requested that they provide asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle land striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. The commenter raises concerns, which state that the County can reject a concession request if there would be an adverse impact on public safety. The project frontage is located in excess of 1,000 feet away to the east to the nearest sidewalks. As a result of the isolation, an isolated sidewalk along the project frontage would not provide pedestrians, cyclists, or vehicles with a safer travel experience along Grayson Road. The proposed alternative improvements would provide a safe path for both cyclists and pedestrians. As such, the applicant can legally request this concession, and the County is required to approve it. Shikany Comment 8 The comment states that the concept of a Vesting Tentative Map, which constitutes the plans provided by the proposed project, should be described to the public in the IS/MND’s project description. Specifically, the comment requests that it be disclosed that a Vesting Tentative Map allows the proposed project not to comply with any future changes in regulations following the proposed project’s approval. The comment states that the applicant should be required to provide additional project details in exchange for these Vesting Tentative Map benefits and that the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 22 County should justify why the proposed project is granted the use of a Vesting Tentative Map. In addition to the issuance of a vesting tentative map being a regular and expected part of approving a subdivision in the County, and the proposed project is consistent with the requirements of Contra Costa County Municipal Code Section 94-2.204 which state the required information for the subdivision of land. CEQA does not require that an IS/MND disclose more details in the case that a Vesting Tentative Map is used. Shikany Comment 9 The comment states that the project description provided in the Draft IS/MND lacks sufficient detail to serve as the basis for addressing potential project impacts, and many project details are mentioned only in the analysis sections. The commenter does not go into specific detail with this comment. Responses to specific comments regarding missing items in the IS/MND project description are included in the other responses to this comment letter. Shikany Comment 10 The comment states that the IS/MND’s project description has missing details and is fragmented. The comment specifically references the fact that accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are not referenced in the project description. No ADUs will be developed as part of the proposed project, and thus are not considered as part of the project description for the IS/MND. Shikany Comment 10 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND does not state the distance from the Creek to the riparian corridor setback, nor does it describe the width of the riparian corridor that was previously proposed to be protected through mitigation measures. The proposed project would implement a 50-foot setback from the Grayson Creek centerline. This has been incorporated into the project description in the IS/MND and is shown on the VTM. No adverse impacts were identified for the proposed project and no additional mitigation is necessary to reduce impacts to below a level of significance. The IS/MND is not required to incorporate measures proposed in a CEQA document for a previous project. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 23 Shikany Comment 11 The comment states that the IS/MND project description does not mention the waiver of setback for retaining walls included in the land use section. Furthermore, the comment states that the Draft IS/MND does not describe the location of the retaining walls. The Vesting Tentative Map shows the location of the proposed retaining walls. Though not described in the project description, the waiver is shown in the Land Use Section of the IS/MND in the table of development standards. Shikany Comment 12 The comment states that much of the proposed project’s site plan lacks labels for many of the lines shown, including, but not limited to, the top of the creek bank and the centerline of the creek channel. The comment is noted but does not impact the environmental analysis for the project. All impacts and mitigations would be expected to remain the same. Shikany Comment 12 The comment states that the IS/MND project description misses information regarding riparian, oak woodland, and other protected habitat and vegetation on the project site. Furthermore, the IS/MND project description does not describe any wildlife that utilizes the project site. The comment states that this information should be in the project description, not the analysis sections. Information on protected habitats, wildlife, and vegetation are found the Biological Resources section of the IS/MND. The proposed project, including the identified mitigation measures, was designed to accommodate a 50-foot creek setback to avoid impacts to the adjacent Grayson Creek and surrounding habitat to the greatest extent feasible, including the avoidance of trees within the riparian corridor. Shikany Comment 13 The comment states that the description of the area surrounding the project site, that it is single-family residential development, is vague and inaccurate. The commenter states that the adjacent area in unincorporated Contra Costa County has a lower density and smaller unit size than the adjacent area within the City of Pleasant Hill and that the proposed project would not be consistent with the density of the surrounding homes in unincorporated Contra Costa County. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 24 The project description states that the surrounding area consists of single-family homes, which is accurate. The difference in density and size of the surrounding homes in Contra Costa County in comparison to the surrounding homes in the City of Pleasant Hill is noted. However, the project site and the surrounding areas to the south have a land use designation of Single-Family Residential–Low (SL), and are zoned as R-15. The R-15 zoning designation is primarily for single-family detached homes, and permits a unit density of 1.0 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The Density Bonus Law allows for increased density of the proposed project to 3.28 dwelling units per acre. As such, the proposed density is consistent with the SL land use designation. Shikany Comment 14 The comment states that the IS/MND has not listed a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW, and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as required discretionary approvals. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND states that a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW is required. The Hydrology and Water Quality section outlines RWQCB requirements to implement stormwater controls. The proposed project’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan would be approved as part of the Construction General Permit from the RWQCB. Shikany Comment 15 The comment states that while classified as an urban area by the Census Bureau, the visual character of the project area is still relatively rural, with significant tree cover and larger lots. The comment states that the project’s density and home size is inconsistent with the immediate surrounding area. The comment also states that solely considering lot size when determining aesthetic impacts is misleading and that the density and size of the proposed homes is not consistent with the surrounding development in unincorporated Contra Costa County. The analysis in the IS/MND considers numerous issues when evaluating potential aesthetic impacts. As explained in the Aesthetics section of the IS/MND, the proposed project would comply with applicable zoning and other regulations concerning aesthetics with certain concessions to the R-15 zoning development standards allowed by the Density Bonus Law. Additionally, the proposed project would include a landscaping plan that will enhance the aesthetic character to maintain adequate screening and privacy in the area. The aesthetic difference between the property and other less dense properties in the area, thus, would not be considered a significant environmental impact. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 25 Shikany Comment 16 The comment states that the density of the development must be reduced for the proposed project to not degrade the existing visual character. The comment states that lot size, width, and setback waivers could then be eliminated, and increased setbacks from the creek to the proposed residential development could also be accomplished. The project site and the surrounding areas to the south have a land use designation of Single-Family Residential–Low (SL), and are zoned as R-15. The R-15 zoning designation is primarily for single-family detached homes, and permits a unit density of 1.0 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The Density Bonus Law allows for increased density of the proposed project to 3.28 dwelling units per acre. As such, the proposed density is consistent with the SL land use designation. A change in the visual character from largely undeveloped to more developed would be consistent with the surrounding area and is, thus, not expected to be a significant visual impact. Shikany Comment 17 The comment requests that if a landscaping plan is used to make a less than significant determination in the aesthetics analysis, the proposed project should have measurable performance standards, and that the requirement for “adequate planting of trees and other landscaping” is not a measurable performance standard, and that there needs to be a clear and detailed definition of “adequate.” The landscaping plan would be reviewed for adequacy prior to issuance of a building permit for the project. The plan would have to meet County Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance requirements which provide planting details for each area of the property, and would include the requirements of Mitigation Measure Biology 2, including the planning of approximately 54 native riparian woodland trees. The Mitigation Measure prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodland in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with a replacement tree planting plan that shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. This implementation includes bonding to ensure that the plantings are viable or replaced. Thus, the landscaping plan would have measurable performance standards and is reasonably considered a justification as why the project aesthetic impacts would be less than significant. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 26 Shikany Comment 18 The comment states that the Mitigation Measure Aesthetics-1 does not provide lighting standards that prevent light from spilling out onto the creek and riparian corridor. The mitigation measure clearly identifies what design standards are required for the lighting plan, including that all lights be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements. Shikany Comment 19 The commenter states that no reports were attached to the MND, and thus, the public was restricted in their ability to comment on the findings. All non-confidential appendices and technical reports may be released to the public upon request. Shikany Comment 20 The commenter states that there is no discussion regarding what public agencies with jurisdiction over potentially impacted resources were consulted about this project prior to completion of the initial study. The County notices all public agencies with potential jurisdiction over the project upon initial review of the application. As discussed in the agency comment section of the is staff report, agencies have provided comments regarding the standards and requirements under their purview. The discussion of these standards is mentioned throughout the IS/MND as applicable in each section. Shikany Comment 21 This commenter states that the proposed project could have significant adverse permanent effects and will preclude reestablishment of existing habitat. The commenter further states that the IS/MND only addresses temporary construction impacts, and not permanent adverse impacts, and that there is no analysis of the impacts of noise, lights, and other residential activities on what habitat and wildlife will remain, as well as on reestablishment of destroyed habitat (for example, residential uses leave no room for replanting of removed trees.). The impact of noise, lights, and other residential activities are addressed in the BRA Addendum and the IS/MND. Site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor through trespass, impacts associated with lighting and ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 27 structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, to be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements to be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off-site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Mitigation Measure Biology-6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 requires on-site replacement of trees removed at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with trees spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. Tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 7 prescribes the planting of Valley Oak Woodland species within all on-site undeveloped areas. Project design includes the avoidance of approximately 30 percent of the on-site trees, all other trees will be replaced. Implementation of the project design (including avoidance measures) and the two abovementioned mitigation measures minimize impacts to on-site trees and woodlands through avoidance and replacement, which reduces the magnitude of permanent tree/habitat removal. Thus, the IS/MND does consider and mitigate for both temporary and permanent biological resource impacts. Shikany Comment 22 The commenter states that there is no analysis or mitigation to address likely intrusions by residents into the riparian corridor that would be facilitated by the close proximity of proposed homes with shallow rear yards to the riparian corridor, and that a thorough analysis of ongoing residential impacts must be provided. As discussed in the previous response, project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Shikany Comment 23 The commenter states that the habitat types listed add up to 2.61 acres, yet the project site is listed as 3.05 acres, and questions what is occurring on the missing 0.44 acre? ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 28 Land Cover Types listed include 3.05 acres of Developed Land, Mixed Woodland, Valley Oak Woodland, and Riparian Woodland. The breakdown of the acreage is provided below: • Developed (.21 acre) • Mixed Woodland (0.62 acre) • Valley Oak Woodland (1.18 acres) • Riparian Woodland (1.01 acres) This is not considered significant new information and all impacts related to the land cover types were considered within he biological resource assessment for the project. Shikany Comment 24 The commenter questions how avoidance measures reference in Mitigation Measure Biology-1 will be implemented in the case that rare plants are found. They also ask what is proposed to be done with salvaged seed or root stock, given the development in the surrounding area. They ask if vegetation replacement for sensitive plants would occur in the riparian corridor. Mitigation Measure Biology-1 states that if CNPS-Ranked species are observed on- site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. Impacts to special-status species will be avoided through salvage of seeds or individual plants (root stock) in coordination with a qualified institution capable of propagating these species for planting off-site in protected environs. In addition, if CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, the project proponent proposes to prepare a plan to accomplish salvage and relocation/replacement that states methods of salvage, storage, and replacement planting of seeds or plants, and to identify receptor sites, set target numbers to be established, describe monitoring methods, and define requirements for maintenance and annual monitoring reports. Additionally, protocol rare plant surveys were conducted in 2023 by JMC Botanist Haley Henderson resulted in negative findings for rare plants. Ms. Henderson conducted appropriately timed focused floristic surveys on March 23, May 9, and June 8, 2023. Surveys were conducted to ensure that the primary bloom window was covered for each of the regionally known special-status plant species with potentially suitable habitat on the project site. No special-status plant species were observed during these focused floristic surveys, or previously conducted general ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 29 site surveys. Shikany Comment 25 The commenter states that the language in Mitigation Measure Biology 2, which requires replacement of on-site riparian woodland and Valley Oak Woodland to the greatest extent practicable, contains nebulous language and asks the following questions: What determines what is or is not practicable? Will the developer be allowed to argue that it is not practicable to replace any of the trees, or half of the trees? Mitigation Measure Biology 2 calls for trees removed from the riparian woodland to be “replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable.” The practicability of in-kind and on-site planting is the issue to be considered, not the replacement ratio. A tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. The landscape professional would be adequately qualified to determine the practicability of planting replacements. Shikany Comment 26 The commenter states that project mitigation should call for avoidance of removing the habitat on the project site by removing multiple lots from the development, and the County is not obligated to allow the proposed density and that CEQA requires avoidance as a first step in mitigating project impacts The Density Bonus project is consistent with the allowed density on the project site and is an infill project within a developed residential neighborhood. Though lots could be removed from the development proposal resulting in less impacts to the habitat on the site, the project as proposed and mitigated is not expected to have a significant impact on biological resources. Shikany Comment 27 The commenter asks where the 158 trees being replace will be planted. They note that replacement trees in the riparian corridor would need to be evaluated for impacts to the existing habitat. They question the feasibility of planting replacement trees on-site, and list reasons that Mitigation Measure Biology-2 is not achievable. They further describe that the impact of removing the trees must be analyzed and location of replacement trees must be documented. They state that it must be documented how trees will be protected from removal. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 30 Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes that planted trees shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits. A tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. The majority of the project site is regularly disked, occurs within a matrix of suburban development, and includes existing on-site residential development. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 requires on-site replacement of trees removed at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with trees spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 7 prescribes the planting of Valley Oak Woodland species within all on-site undeveloped areas. Multiple trees on the project site will be preserved and others will be replaced. Implementation of the project design (including avoidance measures) and the two abovementioned mitigation measures minimize impacts to on-site trees and woodlands through replacement plantings, which reduces the magnitude of permanent tree/habitat removal. Shikany Comment 28 This comment lists performance standards that they believe must be included in Mitigation Measure Biology 2. In addition to the details regarding the landscaping plan outlined in the previous response, the trees planted as mitigation would be monitored, maintained, and replaced as needed. Recorded Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will provide a perpetual source of funding and responsibility for the trees. The required annual inspection (to be conducted prior to October 1 every year), ongoing maintenance, and the requirement to provide for the replacement of the mitigation trees will be included in the CC&Rs recorded against each of the proposed properties. A copy of the CC&R(s) will be provided to the County prior to installation of the permanent fencing. Shikany Comment 29 The commenter states that Mitigation Measure Biology 4 and Mitigation Measure Biology 5 should be rewritten to be very clear about what must occur regarding special-status amphibians and reptiles. As discussed in the IS/MND immediately proceeding Mitigation Measure Biology 4 and Biology 5, USFWS-approved capture and relocation would occur if species are found. The qualified biologist or biological monitor that is required by the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 31 mitigations would ensure that all workers at the project site are aware of the required protocols for western pond turtle and Alameda whipsnake. Shikany Comment 30 The commenter states that replanting oak woodland in the riparian corridor would be inappropriate. They state that several lots of the proposed project must be removed in order to fulfill Mitigation Measure Biology-7. As discussed above, the replanting plan would be prepared by a qualified landscape professional to determine practicability of the replantings. The professional would identify appropriate locations for the replantings on the site to ensure the health of the replantings. All replantings would be monitored for viability and would be replaced if necessary. Shikany Comment 31 The commenter states that tree cutting resulting in deposition of debris in the creek channel occurred while the developer was working on permitting the subdivision, as reported by adjoining neighbors. The commenter states that the Arborist Report, the BRA, and the MND do not address this. The commenter asks if this was considered when the biological report was updated in 2022. A dead Monterey pine tree that was considered a safety hazard was removed from the site on October 28, 2021. Removal of this dead tree was not done as part of project activities. This work would be considered regular management and maintenance of the site. Shikany Comment 32 The commenter states that several oak trees in the riparian corridor would be removed and questions whether some of these trees can be retained, per recommendations of the Arborist Report. The proposed project was designed to accommodate a 50-foot creek setback to avoid impacts to the adjacent Grayson Creek to the greatest extent feasible, including the avoidance of trees within the riparian corridor. Because root zones of trees within the corridor may be impacted by construction of project elements occurring outside of the creek setback, and accordingly, their removal was recommended by the Arborist. Additionally, tree No. 136 is a non-native silver dollar eucalyptus (Eucalyptus cinerea) with a failed trunk, and tree No. 194 and No. 195 are dying Siberian elms (Ulmus sp.). Furthermore, these non-native trees were recommended for removal by the Arborist due to health and location within the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 32 grading limits. Trees No. 137 and No. 138 are native oaks that occur very adjacent to the top of bank of Grayson Creek and the proposed project was designed to avoid trees such as these. Native oaks, tree No. 114, No. 115, No. 116, No. 169, and NO. 169b occur approximately between 50 and 80 feet beyond the centerline of Grayson Creek, making project planning of to avoid impacts to these trees (including their root systems) infeasible. If it is determined that additional native trees can be protected in place while still achieving project objectives (as determined by the project Arborist in coordination with the Construction Manager and the project proponent), the project proponent will determine if additional trees can be saved based upon the potential impacts from the grading to the root structure of the trees by “field-fit” grading activities to the greatest extent practicable to conduct such avoidance. This requirement would be included as a condition of approval. Shikany Comment 33 The commenter states that the IS/MND contains no description of how the riparian setback was established, and no description of the width of the riparian setback from the creek channel, centerline, or from the top of bank. They state that neither the creek centerline nor the top of bank are shown on the development plans. In some areas, the extent of riparian canopy extends far beyond the top of bank of Grayson Creek (such as in the southwestern corner of the project site), while in others, the riparian canopy is minimal and the top of bank is beyond the extent of riparian canopy. It appears the commentor is equating the riparian corridor and the creek structure setback; however, these are not equivalent. The County does not require a “riparian setback.” However, the project design incorporates a required 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. The centerline of Grayson creek is depicted and labeled on the development plans. Shikany Comment 34 The commenter states that Figure 11 of the Biological Report shows the top of bank either commensurate with or extending beyond the riparian setback, which apparently is the drip line of the trees that were determined to comprise the northerly boundary of the riparian corridor. The commenter cites Policy 8.89 of the General Plan Conservation Element requires a minimum 50-foot setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek. The commenter asks how the proposed riparian setback compares to the minimum 50-foot setback. In some areas, the extent of riparian canopy extends far beyond the top of bank of ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 33 Grayson Creek (such as in the southwestern corner of the project site), while in others, the riparian canopy is minimal and the top of bank is beyond the extent of riparian canopy. It appears the commentor is equating the riparian corridor and the creek structure setback; however, these are not equivalent. The County does not require a “riparian setback.” However, the project design incorporates a required 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. Shikany Comment 35 The commenter states that the IS/MND needs to clarify the difference between the riparian setback area and the creek structure setback line, and what can occur within each area. The describe that the project plans show the limit of the riparian area with a note that no grading will be allowed and that beyond that line, the plans show the creek structure setback line. They state that this means grading is allowed up to and below the top of the creek bank, which they state is inappropriate and requires extension of the riparian setback area to a point beyond the top of bank. The proposed project includes a single setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. This setback includes the restriction of construction of aboveground permanent elements such as roads/driveways and structures to be a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of Grayson Creek. While project implementation would require grading and tree removal within the riparian corridor, all grading activities are proposed to remain well outside of top of bank (a minimum of 20 feet). The County’s Creek Structure Setback requires a setback that is defined as a point where a line with slope of 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical, extending from the toe of the channel, intersects the existing ground plus 30 feet horizontal. Shikany Comment 36 The commenter asks if the County has determined that Grayson Creek, or the portion within the proposed subdivision, is a “protected watercourse” and if it requires protection pursuant to County Code Section 914-4.002. The commenter asks for a rationale if it is not protected. Grayson Creek is not identified as a “protected watercourse” within any publicly available maps, reports, or databases. Though the County, in its sole discretion may designate a natural watercourse as a “protected watercourse,” Grayson Creek has not been designated. Additionally, the protections for the creek from the required Creek Structure Setback and Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) would provide preservation of the resource. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 34 Shikany Comment 37 The commenter states that the IS/MND does not address impacts associated with the establishment and ongoing activities of permanent residential uses close to Grayson Creek and does not address that the proposed residential lots include the riparian area. They state that due to the setback waivers coupled with the number of lots proposed, there is little rear yard on the majority of the lots, which could encourage the use of the riparian area as part of the homes backyards. Site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor from potential usage, impacts associated with lighting and structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, to be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements to be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off-site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Mitigation Measure Biology 6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. Shikany Comment 38 The commenter states that a permanent fence was previously proposed by Mitigation Measure Biology 6, but is no longer included as a mitigation measure. The comment asks how the County would ensure that future property owners do not extend their backyards into the protection riparian area. The commenter provides multiple questions about the design of the fence and questions why the fence was removed and how the County intends to protect the riparian area from extension of the proposed lots. The proposed project would incorporate a fence along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. As this fence is part of project plans, it is no longer considered a mitigation measure. Furthermore, the perpetual exclusion of residents from the creek is not necessary given the requirements of the creek structure setback which would provide adequate protection of a majority of the riparian area. Shikany Comment 39 The commenter states that it appears that a deed restriction of the creek structure setback is no longer required by Mitigation Measure Biology-6 and asks for clarification. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 35 All the properties within the creek structure setback would be subject to deed restrictions (as required by County Code and as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map) prohibiting the property owners from developing the portion of their properties occurring within the setback, including the construction of permanent structures such as ADUs, pools, fences, etc. Shikany Comment 40 The commenter states that the less than significant impact to State and federally protected wetlands is based on a number of project features that are not adequate. No State or federally protected wetlands occur within the development area of the project site. While project implementation would result in impacts to the riparian corridor associated with Grayson Creek, it would avoid direct impacts (fill or modification) to Grayson Creek. Shikany Comment 41 The commenter speculates that future homeowners will unlawfully expand their backyards into the deed-restricted creek structure setback. The commenter asks how expansion of backyards into the setback area will be monitored and prevented. The proposed project would include an enforceable deed restriction in addition to local land use controls to prevent unauthorized land uses. All structures requiring a building permit would be vetted by County staff during review, including enforcement of the setback. Shikany Comment 42 The commenter states that Sheet 4 of the development plans provides information as to how the creek structure setback was calculated, and question the basis for the location of the cross-sections, how the number and location of cross-sections was determined to be adequate for the establishment of the structure setback lines, and how it was determined that the entire creek section is adequately represented by these cross-sections. The extent of the creek structure setback was calculated from the top of bank, which was determined in accordance with Title 9, Division 914 (§§ 914-14.010, 914- 14.012, 914-14.014) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Because the height of the TOB is less than 20 feet above the channel invert, the required horizontal distance between top of bank and the setback line is 30 feet. The entire ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 36 creek corridor was mapped to determine the extent of top of bank, and accordingly the extent of the creek structure setback. While the creek structure set back was determined by location the top of bank, functionally the creek structure setback occurs at a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of the Grayson Creek channel. Shikany Comment 43 The commenter states that County Code Section 914-14.012(d) states that where significant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required by Section (c) of this same section (the limits the subdivision utilizes), the County may extend the setback line to include such areas. The commenter asks what the basis was for not requiring this additional area, given the number of oaks and other trees that are proposed to be removed, since the trees being removed have crowns that are part of the riparian canopy? The County has discretion in determining the Creek Structure Setback. To accommodate the proposed Density Bonus Project, the use of a majority of the project site was required and additional setback would have made the project infeasible. Shikany Comment 44 The commenter states that, while the IS/MND properly notes that the Grayson Creek riparian area serves as a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursey sites, it does not acknowledge that the oak woodland provides nesting habitat for migrating birds and other wildlife that utilizes the property. The BRA Addendum identifies that a nursery site is an area where juveniles occur at higher densities, avoid predation more successfully, or grow faster there than in a different habitat. While the project site is regularly disked, the trees, shrubs, and structures occurring on-site as well as the Grayson Creek riparian corridor have been identified as supporting suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats. Mitigation Measures Biology 2, Biology 3, Biology 4, Biology 5, and Biology 8, which requires tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to nursery sites as well as all nesting, roosting, and dispersing wildlife. Shikany Comment 45 The commenter asks how the removal of most of the existing habitat on the site and development of residential uses with a narrow riparian corridor would not impede use of wildlife corridors and nursey sites located at the project site. They ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 37 ask if the 0.8 acre of riparian corridor that would remain would be sufficient to address all current wildlife migration and nursery uses on the project site, even though it would have residential uses directly adjacent to it. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor has been identified as a potential wildlife corridor and nursery site; the remainder of the project site has not been identified as either a wildlife corridor or a nursery site. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor would remain largely untouched by implementation of the proposed project, with the exception of construction within 0.21 acre of riparian habitat (necessitating riparian tree removal along its northern boundary) and implementation of a riparian tree planting plan to mitigate impacts to trees. Furthermore, the infill project is surrounded by residential development. Shikany Comment 46 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND is missing information regarding the connectivity of Grayson Creek with off-site portions of watercourse and habitats for fish. The proposed project would not alter Grayson Creek or interfere with the movement of off-site wildlife through the portion of Grayson Creek that is located on the project site. The comment does not provide any basis for finding the proposed project would impact special-status species wildlife movement through the site. Shikany Comment 47 The commenter states that Mitigation Measure Biology 2 through Biology 6 call for tree replacement, but that the requirement is unachievable. The tree replacement would occur as discussed in the responses above. The replacement would be enforceable and implementable. Shikany Comment 48 The commenter states that the IS/MND does not include post-construction measures for protection of the riparian area. The Creek Structure Setback would be recorded against the proposed properties in perpetuity. Additionally, the tree replanting would be monitored and bonded to ensure the health of replacement trees, and CC&Rs for the project would include maintaining the trees on the property. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 38 Shikany Comment 49 The commenter states that the previous MND required fencing along the riparian boundary and a deed restriction of the creek structure setback area prohibiting development. As discussed above, the fence is proposed as part of the project and the Creek Structure Setback would be recorded against the properties as part of the VTM. Shikany Comment 50 The commenter states that the proposed project poses a potentially significant impact to the movement of wildlife, and the less than significant impact conclusion in the IS/MND is not fully supported. As discussed above, site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor from potential usage, impacts associated with lighting and structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, and Mitigation Measure Biology 6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. With the implementation of these measures, the BRA Addendum for the project determined that the impact would be less than significant. Shikany Comment 51 The commenter states that the discussion of wildlife impacts does not mention CEQA Section 21083.4 regarding the protection and mitigation of impacts to oak woodland. CEQA Section 21083.4 requires that the County determine whether a project within its jurisdiction may result in a conversion of oak woodlands that will have a significant effect on the environment and allows for the County to develop suitable measures to mitigate those impacts as well as the mitigation of impacts to oak woodland through the planting of “an appropriate number of trees.” Mitigation Measure Biology 2 calles for the replacement of native trees at a 3:1 ratio and the non-native trees at a 1:1 ratio and is consistent with County practice and implementation of its tree protection and preservation ordinance. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 39 Shikany Comment 52 The commenter states that General Plan Policy 8-6 requires significant trees to be preserved, yet over 72 percent of the 117 trees on-site will be removed and 17 of the remaining trees will be subject to dripline encroachment. The commenter states that the project does not preserve significant trees and vegetation. The commenter also discusses that tree replacement is impossible at the rate required by General Plan Policy 8-12 and that the proposed residential lots should be reduced by half to mitigate this impact. The project design includes retention and preservation of the greatest number of trees practicable while also accommodating the Density Bonus Project. Mitigation Measure Biology 9 calls for trees retained and preserved, but subjected to dripline encroachment, to be monitoring by the project Arborist during encroachment and all damage to trees scheduled for preservation will be appropriately mitigated. In balancing the many policies identified in the General Plan, including the interest of providing adequate housing for the residents of the County, the impact to trees and vegetation on the project site and mitigation of it are reasonable. Shikany Comment 53 The commenter explains that one of the reasons tree removal can be approved according to County Code is “reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot.” The commenter asks what determines “reasonable development” and states that the proposed project could utilize smaller development footprints to avoid such extensive tree and habitat removal. The commenter states that CEQA requires avoidance of environmental impacts as a first step, but that there seems to be no consideration or discussion of how removal of trees or habitat could be avoided, nor any justification provided for their removal. The commenter states that the density of the proposed project needs to be significantly reduced. The proposed project has been designed to avoid impacts to natural habitats and resources where feasible. Project design elements include incorporating a structure setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek of a minimum of 50 feet, as well as avoidance and preservation of many trees and tree clusters, and isolation of the residential development from the preserved riparian corridor. Shikany Comment 54 The comment states that the neighborhood does not have adequate bike lanes and ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 40 sidewalks to travel to a nearby commercial district and the Pleasant Hill Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station, and states that walking on Grayson Road is dangerous given the excessive traffic. The comment further questions if there is a bike lane that fully connects to the Pleasant Hill BART station. The IS/MND thoroughly evaluated potential safety issues that would result from the proposed project. The proposed project would comply with applicable County General Plan policies outlined in the Public Safety Element. The applicant would install bicycle lane striping as part of the proposed project. Furthermore, there is no sidewalk to the east for over 1,000 feet and no bike lanes or sidewalks that fully connects to the Pleasant Hill BART station which is over 3.5 miles to the east. It would be unreasonable for the project, which only includes 8 additional residences, to implement improvements that connect the development to this area. Shikany Comment 55 The comment states that the proposed waiver for the construction of sidewalks on the proposed project’s frontage to Grayson Road is inappropriate given that the proposed project’s density would create an increased need for sidewalks along Grayson Road. The comment adds that if sidewalks are developed in the area in the future, they would be unjustifiably installed at taxpayer expense. As stated previously, pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence. None of the conditions to deny the concession apply, thus, the County cannot reject the requested concession. Shikany Comment 56 The comment states that fire risk in the project area is high and contains significant vegetation and overhead power lines. The comment asks if power lines will be undergrounded on the project site. The comment further states that overhead power lines and vegetation surrounding the project site pose a risk regardless of the proposed project undergrounding power lines on-site. The comment argues that reduced yard setbacks, proposed high density development, and the placement of proposed development next to wooded areas would result in a high fire risk that could easily spread between proposed and existing houses. The Wildfire section of the IS/MND discusses how the site is within a designated High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and conducted an analysis of the proposed project’s fire risk accordingly. The analysis found that the proposed project would comply with the California Fire Code and California Building Standards Code to ensure that proposed development contains appropriate fire protections, and ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 41 would be reviewed by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) and other interested fire protection agencies in accordance with County General Plan Measure 7-au. The IS/MND determined that all new utility infrastructure that would serve the proposed project would be undergrounded, minimizing potential impacts to fire risk. Furthermore, the IS/MND analyzes vegetation risk to wildfire as well, and determined that the proposed project would be subject to the CCCFPD Ordinance, which would include design standards and management regulations such as weed abatement and brush clearance regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. As such, impacts from on-site vegetation on fire risk would be minimized to a less than significant level. Lastly, adjacent existing overhead power lines constitute the existing conditions of the project area and would not be altered by the proposed project. As such, wildfire risks related to these overhead power lines would not be affected by the proposed project and are thus not within the scope of the IS/MND’s environmental analysis. Shikany Comment 57 The commenter states that the claim in the IS/MND that fire risk will be reduced by vegetation removal demonstrates that the County is not committed to re- establishing habitats that would be removed as a result of the proposed project. The commenter questions whether the County actually intends to enforce the replacement mitigation. As stated in Mitigation Measure Biology 2, the proposed project would be required to submit a tree replacement plan and a landscape plan prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect, which would be prepared in compliance with the 2022 California Fire Code (CFC). The CFC includes specific requirements regarding fire- resistant landscaping and fire-resistant vegetation. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 states that most of the replacement trees would be various species of oak tree, which are considered fire-resistant trees, per the CFC. Tree replacement at the project site would not increase the risk of wildfire because it would be designed in compliance with the CFC and would adhere to the tree replacement and landscape plans required by Mitigation Measure Biology 2. Shikany Comment 58 The comment states that the IS/MND does not address the increased fire risk brought to the entire County due to climate change and ongoing drought. As such, the comment finds it inappropriate to increase density on the project site. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 42 The comment pertaining to fire risk increases throughout the County due to climate change and ongoing drought are speculative and therefore outside the scope of the IS/MND. The comment does not provide any specific information related to whether the proposed project would materially affect evacuation routes in the area or impact any existing wildfire issues. The IS/MND discusses that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to fire risk, for the reasons discussed above. Shikany Comment 59 The comment states that the proposed project would interfere with the groundwater supplies and recharge given the increase of impervious surfaces the project proposes and given the direction of stormwater runoff from impermeable surfaces into the storm drain system. The proposed project’s Hydrology and Stormwater Control Plan shows the proposed bioretention basin would be constructed as a flow-through planter following specifications found in the County Clean Water Program Technical Guidance Handbook. As such, a portion of stormwater runoff flowing through the bioretention basin would permeate through the basin and provide groundwater recharge, and the other portion of stormwater would continue into the public stormwater drainage system. Therefore, the analysis made in the IS/MND is correct, and impacts pertaining to groundwater recharge from implementation of the proposed project are less than significant. Shikany Comment 60 The commenter is concerned that the proposed project could impact the amount of stormwater runoff feeding into Grayson Creek and change the drainage pattern of the project site. The proposed project stormwater runoff would not increase the peak flow rates from the added impervious surface area as a result of the biofiltration basin proposed for the project. Post-Development runoff of the proposed project would match or reduce the pre-development. The required detention volume of 555 cubic feet has been determined and is identified the project SWCP. The SWCP demonstrates that the proposed project would contain adequate facilities to accommodate the post-project stormwater runoff. Shikany Comment 61 The comment asserts that the County’s density calculation is incorrect, stating that ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 43 the County used 2.99 dwelling units per acre rather than 2.9 as stated in the Draft IS/MND resulting in 8.28 units per acre, rounded to nine base units for this subdivision. The comment states that net average calculations for the proposed project are incorrect, finding that 0.29 acre for the street and 1.5 deed -restricted acres for the Grayson Creek structure setback area would need to be removed from the project site’s gross area for an accurate net acreage calculation. The Density Bonus Law defines base density as “gross density” (Government Code § 65915(f)). Assembly Bill (AB) 2501, a bill signed into law in 2016, clarified that a "density bonus" means an increase over the maximum allowable gross residential density. Moreover, the Density Bonus Law states that it “shall be interpreted liberally in favor of producing the maximum number of total housing units” (Government Code § 65915(r)). Therefore, under the Density Bonus Law the County must honor the applicant’s request to utilize the gross acreage of the parcel and the associated calculation of the maximum allowable gross density. The calculation must be based upon the total acreage of the project site and not reduced by the required County roadway dedications. Shikany Comment 62 The commenter states that a mitigation measure requiring a creek structure setback area be protected from development via a permanent deed restriction and dedication of development rights to the County should be added back to the Draft IS/MND. The Creek Structure Setback is required by the County Code and it is not necessary or appropriate to include it as a separate mitigation measure. Shikany Comment 63 The comment states that given the number of lots, the waiver on lot width creates lot widths completely inconsistent with the surrounding area. As explained in the IS/MND Land Use and Planning section, the minimum lot size, lot width, depth, retaining wall setbacks, and front and side yard setbacks for the R- 15 zoning designation would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density. As such, the proposed project is granted waivers to these standards pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law. Shikany Comment 64 The comment requests clarification on the need for setback requirement waiver for retaining walls. The comment asks where these retaining walls would be located. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 44 Waivers to the R-15 zoning designation are provided under State Density Bonus Law if a project is physically precluded from occurring due to zoning requirements, as is the case with the setback requirement for retaining walls. As described previously, pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence. Shikany Comment 65 The comment states that the baseline density stated by the Draft IS/MND of the project site, nine dwelling units, would not be able to meet R-15 zoning requirements for lot size, lot width, and setbacks. As such, the comment states that the project site’s baseline density would be illegal and cannot be considered. As discussed above, the project qualifies for waivers to development standards so that it can accommodate the level of density allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law. Shikany Comment 66 The comment questions how the County concluded that the inclusion of a moderate-income affordable lot into the proposed project drives the need for Density Bonus Law waivers when development standard waivers would still need to be in place to feasibly develop nine units, the established baseline density, on the project site. The comment also requests an explanation for the application of development standard waivers for all lots, and not just the proposed affordable unit lot. The Density Bonus Law allows waivers and concessions to R-15 zoning standards because an increased density often physically preclude a project from following all design standards for its land use and zoning designations. These waivers apply to all development in the proposed project to accommodate the increase in density permitted by the State Density Bonus Law, not solely to the proposed affordable housing. Shikany Comment 67 The comment states that waivers can only be granted if they result in no impacts to public health or safety. The comment explains that the waiver of sidewalk requirements on Grayson Road would negatively impact the public health and safety, particularly when the Draft IS/MND analyzes that the proposed project is within walking distance to nearby commercial districts. The comment requests an explanation of how the County intends to make the finding that the waiver for ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 45 sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road does not harm public health and safety. The proposed frontage improvements would allow for reasonably safe pedestrian and bicycle travel. Furthermore, the Density Bonus Law does not require findings for granting a concession. To reject a concession, a jurisdiction has to if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence. Given that the project includes frontage improvements that could safely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, the County cannot reasonably reject the concession request. Shikany Comment 68 The comment states that the inclusion of moderate-income housing into the proposed project is solely to maximize the proposed project’s density. Additionally, the comment finds that the proposed project’s waivers and concessions are made with the intention to facilitate more high-end housing, not create affordable housing. The comment further states that the proposed affordable unit is in the worst location and is the smallest lot and home in the subdivision and will reveal itself as being of a different income level to other proposed units. This comment addresses the project developer’s intentions regarding the Density Bonus Law and comments on the location of the affordable unit. These features are not relevant to the environmental analysis of the proposed project. Shikany Comment 69 The comment asks if the County has received proof that the requested Density Bonus Law incentives and waivers are financially necessary to construct the proposed affordable unit. The Density Bonus Law requires that the County must waive any development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a qualifying project, pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(e)(1). Shikany Comment 70 The comment states that the proposed project would result in a project site subdivision with significant unmitigated impacts to public trust resources, as well as impacts resulting from a development completely out of character with its surroundings, due to its extremely high density. The comment questions if the County allows for the development of projects with significant impacts to public trust resources for the purpose of including one affordable unit. Environmental impact concerns resulting from high density development are ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 46 addressed in the IS/MND. Furthermore, the project qualifies for the density bonus and the County does not have discretion in granting the allowed density. Shikany Comment 71 The comment states that the proposed project would contain impacts to the public’s health and safety that are against housing law. The comment questions how the County intends to address the health and safety impacts resulting from the density of the proposed project. The project is not expected to have unmitigated impacts to health and safety. The project is allowed for under the State’s Density Bonus Law to address the unmet need for housing throughout the state. The eight new residences on the infill site could be reasonable accommodated and mitigations are in place to reduce the impacts from the small project. Shikany Comment 72 The comment states that Table 1 of the IS/MND, Contra Costa County Ordinance Code R-15 Requirements, is misleading, as it does not contain the developable area for each lot. The comment continues that the usable area of many of these lots is no more than approximately half the lot, and in the case of Lots 3, 4, and 5 may be less than half the listed lot size. The comment surmises that the proposed project would result in a subdivision with a density and visual appearance that is not appropriate for the project site. The proposed density of the project is based on the area of the project site and allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law. The project would be considered consistent with the R-15 standards based on the waivers allowed for by the State Density Bonus Law. Shikany Comment 73 The comment explains concerns about the number of waivers and concessions that would be granted as part of the proposed project. The comment states that granting the proposed waivers is against the public interest and should be limited or denied. The project is allowed under the State Density Bonus Law. The number of concessions and waivers is consistent with the law in order to accommodate the level of density and affordable unit. The financial values of environmental impacts and features of the proposed project are not a part of the CEQA review. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 47 Shikany Comment 74 The comment requests for Mitigation Measure Noise 1 to be amended to have the County require the project developer or contractor to mail a notice to each nearby resident providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. Though the mitigation measure adequately reduces the noise impacts to less than significant levels, this requirement has been added as a condition of project approval. Shikany Comment 75 The comment states that the hours of operation for noise-producing activities are excessive, and requests that noise-producing activities during the week conclude at 6:00 p.m. The comment also requests that Saturday noise-generating activities occur between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The comment concludes that noise-generating activities should be limited according to the project area’s quiet surrounding neighborhood. The project would include standard conditions of approval that would limit the construction to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Shikany Comment 76 The commenter provides multiple concerns related to the lack of sidewalks along the project frontage. As discussed above, the concession request for alternative frontage improvements is allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law and can only be rejected if adequate findings are made by the County. Given that the project proposes alternative frontage improvements that provide for reasonably safe pedestrian and bicyclist travel along the project frontage, the County cannot reject the concession requested. Shikany Comment 77 The comment asks if there will be an addition of ADUs to the proposed project, as this would increase the trip generation and parking needs of the proposed project. The comment requests that the Draft IS/MND take any proposed ADU-related potential traffic impacts into account. No ADUs would be developed as part of the proposed project. As such, no ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 48 potential impacts are anticipated and no further action is required. Shikany Comment 78 The comment notes that while the proposed project would not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature, it would result in increased vehicle traffic. The comment notes that current driving from Mohawk Drive into Grayson Road is difficult due to existing traffic exceeding the 35 mile per hour (mph) speed limit established on Grayson Road. As such, the resulting intersection from the proposed road and Grayson Road would not provide sufficient stopping time for the speed of traffic traveling over the 35 mph speed limit. Therefore, the comment concludes that the proposed project would result in increased traffic risks to existing homes. Increase in traffic as a result of the proposed project is analyzed in the IS/MND Transportation section. The IS/MND describes that the proposed project would generate an additional 8 AM and 8 PM peak-hour trips, which would be well below the traffic impact significance threshold of 100 peak-hour AM and PM trips. Therefore, the proposed project was found to have less than significant traffic impacts. Cars traveling either eastbound or westbound on Grayson Road would have more than 500 feet of sight distance from the project driveway. This is more than adequate to provide for adequate stopping time on the 35 mph designated Grayson Road. e. Kirsten West West Comment 1 The comment notes that protections are in place through zoning and other County protections. However, the comment requests clarification regarding why some of these protections are being waived. The comment letter includes multiple other questions regarding why the project does not conform to County standards including, density, R-15 development standards, and frontage improvement requirements. The State Legislature passed the State Density Bonus Law to require cities and counties to grant a density bonus and other incentives or concessions to housing development projects in which affordable housing is provided. Consistent with State law, the proposed project’s inclusion of one moderate-income housing unit would allow for a 7 percent increase in density. Development on the project site at this density would be physically precluded by the minimum lot size, lot width, depth, retaining wall setbacks, and front and side yard setbacks for the R-15 zoning ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 49 designation. As such, these standards would be waived for the proposed project in accordance with State law. It is important to note that the Density Bonus Law establishes mandatory requirements for the County and is entirely separate from CEQA. Under the Density Bonus Law, the County is precluded from applying any development standard that would prevent construction of the project unless the County can make specific public health and safety findings. West Comment 2 The commenter asks why code-protected trees are being removed. Project design includes the avoidance of approximately 30 percent of the on-site trees, all other trees will be removed and replaced. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodland in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non- native trees, to be replaced with native trees. This is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice. West Comment 3 The comment notes that the proposed driveway length would cause vehicles to be parked along Grayson Road. The comment states that the proposed project’s 14 - foot setback allowance should not include the garage, and that a minimum 20 -foot driveway should be included for each proposed lot to prevent parking on Grayson Road, which could potentially cause pedestrian and cyclist safety issues. As discussed in the response to Haberman’s comments, the proposed project would enforce a 20-foot minimum front yard setback requirement to the face of the two-car garages in each proposed unit. This would exceed the standard parking stall length of 19 feet, and would thus allow for parking of standard-sized vehicles on the driveways. The proposed frontage improvements are expected to provide adequate pedestrian and cyclist travel facilities along the project frontage. West Comment 3 The comment is concerned with the stated active hours for noise-generating activities on the project site. The comment requests a limit of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for on-site noise-generating activities on Saturday, and a weekday limitation on noise-generating activities from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The comment notes that prior projects in the County have had these restrictions. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 50 As discussed previously, the project would be required to abide by standard hours of construction as a condition of approval. IX.CONCLUSION Staff recommends the Zoning Administrator approve County File #CDSD20-09531, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Attachments: •Findings and Conditions of Approval •Maps •Environmental Review (Comment, IS/MND, MMRP) •Plans Department of Conservation and Development County Planning Commission Wednesday, January 10, 2024 – 6:30 P.M. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item #_____ Project Title: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File Number: #CDSD20-09531 Appellant: Applicant: Patrick King Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde Owner: Grayson Road LLC Zoning/General Plan: R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District / Single-Family Residential Low Density (SL) Site Address/Location: 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 (APNs: 166- 030-001 and 166-030-002) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared which indicates that there will be no significant environmental impact as a result of the project. Project Planner: Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP, (925) 655-2872 Staff Recommendation: Approve (See Section II for Full Recommendation) I. PROJECT SUMMARY This is an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s October 16, 2023, decision to approve a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5- bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. The residence on Lot 1 would be restricted for sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 2 pursuant to the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. The project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow average lot widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirements. The project is also seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees. II. RECOMMENDATION Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) staff recommend that the County Planning Commission: A. UPHOLD the Zoning Administrator’s approval of County File #CDSD20-09531, and DENY the appeal of Patrick King, B. FIND that on the basis of the whole record before the County (Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553), that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project reflects the County’s independent judgment and analysis; C. ADOPT the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) prepared for the project; D. APPROVE the Vesting Tentative Map received January 28, 2022, by the Department of Conservation and Development, Current Planning Division; E. APPROVE the attached findings and conditions of approval prepared for this project; and F. DIRECT Staff to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. III. BACKGROUND This application was heard at the October 2, 2023, and October 16, 2023, Zoning Administrator hearings, where the Zoning Administrator received testimony from the applicant, neighbors, other interested parties, and representatives of the applicant. At the October 16, 2023, hearing, the Zoning Administrator approved the Vesting Tentative Map for the project with minor modifications to the recommended conditions of approval. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 3 On October 26, 2023, neighboring property owner, Patrick King, filed a timely appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision. The appeal letter was signed by Mr. King, other neighbors, and other interested parties that oppose the project. IV. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The subject property is located within the Single-Family Residential Low Density (SL) General Plan land use designation. B. Zoning: The subject property is located within the R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District. C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance: On March 24, 2023, an Initial Study was prepared for the project, and posted and circulated for public review. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was found that the project would not result in any significant environmental impacts. Comments regarding the adequacy of the review were received within the comment period and are discussion of the issues raised is provided in Section VIII below. V. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION The 3.05-gross-acre project site is located on the south side of Grayson Road, opposite the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The roughly L-shaped project site is comprised of two parcels: a northern parcel that fronts on Grayson Road, and a southern parcel that is bound by Grayson Creek to the south and east. Grayson Creek runs roughly east-west along the southern boundary of the project site, then takes a northward bend forming the east boundary. Other private properties with single-family residences abut the property to the north and west. The immediate surrounding area is representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County. Properties along Grayson Road are predominantly developed with single-family residences. Within a half-mile radius, developed parcels range in size from 4,000 square feet to 68,700 square feet, with a median size of approximately 13,000 square feet. The larger vicinity includes a mix of neighborhood-residential uses including single-family residences, churches, schools, and parks. Regional access to the site is provided via I-680 by way of Gregory Lane and Taylor Boulevard and is also provided via State Route (SR) 24 by way of Pleasant Hill Road/Taylor Boulevard. Local access to the project site would be provided via Grayson Road and a new private internal street. VI. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 4 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021-square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. Running southwest to northwest along the southern boundary of the project site is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek. The proposed project does not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees. The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit. In addition to the increased density of one unit (10 units total), the project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. VII. APPEAL OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S DECISION On October 26, 2023, Patrick King, the adjacent property owner, filed a timely appeal with the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) over the decision of the Zoning Administrator (ZA) to approve the proposed project. The following section summarizes the appeal points and provides CDD staff’s response. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 5 Impacts to Oak Woodland and Riparian Woodland The appellant raised concerns about the adequacy of mitigation measures for impacts to oak and riparian woodlands, as well as sensitive plants, within the proposed subdivision project. The following includes responses to specific points raised by the appellant regarding these concerns. Comment: Mitigation Measure Biology 2 lacks performance standards (location of planting, timing for planting, survival milestones, monitoring requirements, planting methodology, bonding requirements, etc.) sufficient to demonstrate that the loss of almost 2 acres of oak and mixed woodland and some additional trees in the riparian woodland will be mitigated below a threshold of significance, an issue also raised by CDFW. All of CDFW's recommendations for additional oak woodland impact analysis were not implemented, and recommended mitigation for the loss of oak woodland habitat was completely dismissed by the County. The comment raises previously addressed concerns about impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities. These were comprehensively addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report responses to CDFW Comment 3 and Shikany Comment 17. As noted there, the December 2022 BRA Addendum by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC, and the recirculated IS/MND analyze project impacts to the sensitive communities. They conclude that the project would remove 1.18 acres of Valley Oak Woodland. The County has not dismissed CDFW’s recommended mitigation measures. Rather, based on the BRA, alternative mitigation measures have been developed that the County believes mitigates the impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 mandates in-kind, on-site replacement at a 3:1 ratio for native trees removed from the Valley Oak Woodland, or out-of-kind 1:1 replacement with natives. A replacement tree planting plan, requiring County approval alongside landscape plans prior to building permits, will detail this. The landscaping plan, reviewed for adequacy before building permit issuance, will comply with County Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance planting specifics and incorporate Mitigation Measure Biology 2's requirements. While this differs from the CDFW recommendation, the mitigation ratio aligns with Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance practices and BRA support. In regard to survival milestones and monitoring, bonding ensures planting viability or replacement for the planted trees and reporting by a qualified arborist to the Department of Conservation and Development is required. Thus, the measurable performance standards in the landscaping plan justify considering project impacts less than significant. Mitigation Measure Biology 7 further strengthens ecological value by requiring Valley Oak Woodland species planting within all on-site undeveloped areas, specifically targeting this sensitive habitat. Prior to the October 16th Zoning Administrator hearing, the applicant provided a draft tree replanting plan to further demonstrate the viability and specificity of CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 6 the mitigation measure. This plan identifies 158 tree replantings (67 at 24" box size, 63 at 15 gallon size, and 32 at 5 gallon size), including 104 oak trees. Within the identified oak woodland on the property, the project proposes to remove 32 native trees. It is reasonable and supported by the evidence in the BRA that these replantings will adequately mitigate the impacts to the oak woodland. This also addresses concerns that the appellant has raised related to the size of the trees that are to be replanted, which was concerned that only smaller less viable trees would be replanted. The comment letter further states that since the mitigation measures require the landscaping plan to be reviewed at a later date, the County is deferring the mitigation measure and since the mitigation states “"to the greatest extent practicable” the mitigation is not certain. As stated above, the applicant has provided a draft landscaping plan that clearly shows that the trees necessary to mitigate impacts to oak woodlands could be accommodated on the site. Impacts to Rare Plants The appellant questions whether Mitigation Measure Biology 1 mitigates impacts to special- status plants. Specifically, the comment questions how the mitigation would reestablish sensitive plants once seed or root stock are removed during grading. These concerns were comprehensively addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report response CDFW Comment 2. As stated there, Mitigation Measure Biology 1, would require that in the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys would be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. Since previous surveys of the site have not identified special-status plants, specific recommendations on the replacement of these not existent plants are provided. Mitigation Measure Biology 1, nevertheless, provides mitigation for heretofore unidentified special- status plants that could exist on the property. These plants would be protected by all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS, and are thus, impacts are expected to be mitigated to a less than significant level. If prior to project construction, the premise of these assumptions is proved to be incorrect, further environmental review could be required. However, based on the available information in the record, the mitigation measures would adequately mitigate impacts to special status species. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 7 Avoidance of Impacts Through Reduced Density The appellant states that MND makes no mention of avoidance of impacts by developing the project at a lesser density. The comment goes on to explain that the County has multiple policies that encourage the preservation of habitats and wildlife, and that the County’s tree protection ordinance only allows tree removal for “reasonable development.” As addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report responses Shikany Comment 26, Shikany Comment 52, and Shikany Comment 53, the Density Bonus project is consistent with the allowed density on the project site and is an infill project within a developed residential neighborhood. Though lots could be removed from the development proposal resulting in less impacts to the habitat on the site, the project as proposed and mitigated is not expected to have a significant impact on biological resources. It is true that less development would result in less impacts – no development would result in no impacts. However, this is not a basis for requiring reduced density below what is allowed under the current regulatory framework. In balancing the many policies identified in the General Plan, including the interest of providing adequate housing for the residents of the County, the impact to trees and vegetation on the project site and mitigation of it are reasonable. The proposed project has been designed to avoid impacts to natural habitats and resources where feasible. Project design elements include incorporating a structure setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek of a minimum of 50 feet, as well as avoidance and preservation of many trees and tree clusters, and isolation of the residential development from the preserved riparian corridor. Impacts from Previously Conducted Works on the Site The appellant states that the applicant has taken actions that already have impacted the biological resources on the site, thus, the CEQA analysis in not adequate. These actions include the removal of a tree, removal of understory vegetation, installation of fencing, and dumping of fill. As addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report response Shikany Comment 31, a dead Monterey pine tree that was considered a safety hazard was removed from the site on October 28, 2021. Removal of this dead tree was not done as part of project activities. There are many reasons for removal of understory vegetation that are associated with the regular maintenance of a property and the County has no reason to believe that any understory removal was associated with the project. This work would be considered regular management and maintenance of the site, outside the scope of CEQA. Similarly, fencing that is less than 7 feet tall can be installed without any County approvals and would be considered regular management outside the scope of the project. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 8 In August of 2021, the County responded to a code enforcement complaint regarding unpermitted fill on the project site. Couty Code Enforcement opened a code enforcement case, which notified the applicant that the fill was not allowed on the site without proper permitting. The case was closed following a code enforcement inspection in June of 2022, which observed that the fill had been removed. The activity on the site was remedied and is not expected to impact the mitigation measures that were developed for the project. Specifically, all surveys and reports that were prepared prior to the unpermitted fill remain fully accurate and provide a reasonable basis for the County’s environmental review of the project, and all mitigation measures and surveys that are to be performed prior to project implementation will assess the site conditions at that time. The appellant questions the timing of when the studies were conducted relative to when other work was done on the property, and provides that the initial BRA was completed prior to work on the property but the addendum was completed after. The County agrees with the appellants assessment but believes that the BRA and addendum are still complete and accurate given that they are based on the biologists observations, which would include observations of impacts caused by non-project work done at the site. Wildlife Corridor Impacts The appellant states that the MND assumes all wildlife movement occurs within the riparian corridor. They say that this is supported by their observation of paths created by wildlife that lead onto the property. As addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report response Shikany Comment 45, the Grayson Creek riparian corridor has been identified as a potential wildlife corridor and nursery site; the remainder of the project site has not been identified as either a wildlife corridor or a nursery site. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor would remain largely untouched by implementation of the proposed project, with the exception of construction within 0.21 acre of riparian habitat (necessitating riparian tree removal along its northern boundary) and implementation of a riparian tree planting plan to mitigate impacts to trees. Furthermore, the infill project is surrounded by residential development. The County used the CEQA Environmental Checklist (Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines) as a guide for analyzing the impacts to wildlife corridors. This checklist, in addition to the BRA for the project are the bases for understanding impacts that could occur from the project. As guided by the checklist, the County has answered whether the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites. In response, the County has identified Grayson Creek corridor and its associated riparian habitat to be presumed to act as a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursery sites. The BRA identifies the Grayson Creek corridor as providing potential suitable foraging and/or dispersal habitat for California red legged frog, Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 9 euryxanthus), and western pond turtle. Additionally, the BRA identifies suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor. It is presumed that the Grayson Creek riparian habitat would provide wildlife nursery sites due to the combination of presence of suitable nesting/roosting and aquatic habitats. The project design incorporates a stream setback along the north side of the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities, project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian wildlife corridor and nursery site. Grading activities within this wildlife corridor could result in direct impacts to terrestrial individuals using the corridor for dispersal. Tree removal would also result in the loss of nesting bird and roosting bat habitat. The project design incorporates a stream setback along the north side of the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities, project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian wildlife corridor and nursery site. Grading activities within this wildlife corridor could result in direct impacts to terrestrial individuals using the corridor for dispersal. Tree removal would also result in the loss of nesting bird and roosting bat habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measures Biology 2 through Biology 6, which require tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, and installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to wildlife corridors and nursery sites to less than significant through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. Additionally, adequate protection of all fish and wildlife resources, including wildlife movement corridors and nursery sites will be defined by the CDFW through the SAA. The SAA program is designed to avoid, minimize, and mitigate any impacts on stream -related resources to a less than significant level under CEQA, and no additional mitigation measures would be necessary. With compliance with all measures defined by the CDFW through the SAA, potential project-related impacts on Grayson Creek and associated fish and wildlife resources, including wildlife movement corridors, nursery sites and other biological resources associated with the riparian habitat are considered less than significant under CEQA Guidelines. Impacts to Grayson Creek The appellant states that the County has failed to adequately analyze the impacts to Grayson Creek and failed to mitigate significant impacts. The comment questions the 50-ft setback, stating that it was not analyzed, and the setback should include significant riparian vegetation along the creek. The appellant goes on to state that Patrick King provided comments during the 2022 MND comment period regarding the creek that were not addressed related to the use of the riparian habitat by birds, and potentially by salmon. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 10 These concerns were previously addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report responses Shikany Comment 48, Shikany Comment 53, and in the March 2023 MND. As stated in the Zoning Administrator staff report, the proposed project has been designed to avoid impacts to natural habitats and resources where feasible. Project design elements include incorporating a structure setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek of a minimum of 50 feet, as well as avoidance and preservation of many trees and tree clusters, and isolation of the residential development from the preserved riparian corridor. A 50-foot Creek Structure Setback would be recorded against the proposed properties in perpetuity. Additionally, tree replanting would be monitored and bonded to ensure the health of replacement trees, and CC&Rs for the project would include maintaining the trees on the property. Furthermore, the Initial Study goes into great detail regarding how birds might be impacted by the project and includes mitigations to limit the impact on these species. The JMC Addendum and Olberding BRA identified that the potential for wildlife to occur on the project site was based on the presence of suitable habitats and occurrences recorded by the CNDDB within the Walnut Creek quadrangle and eight surrounding quadrangles. A total of five bird species were identified to have a moderate to high potential to occur on the project site in a nesting or foraging capacity. The red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), red- tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) all have a high potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. The sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) and American kestrel (Falco sparverius) have a moderate potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red- shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-skinned hawk, and destrel) were present, and observed foraging on the project site. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed on the project site exhibiting nesting behaviors. Based on this information and comments from CDFW on the previously circulated initial study, Mitigation Measures Biology 2 and Biology 3 would be incorporated as part of the project. These mitigation measures specifically address he concerns raised by Mr. King during the 2022 MND comment period. As described in the JMC BRA Addendum, with the implementation of all mitigation measures and conditions defined through the SAA, or other permits related to the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) compliance, if determined necessary by the trustee agencies, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. Impacts would be considered less than significant with mitigation. The appellant also questioned whether the lighting from the project would negatively affect Grayson creek, stating that lighting impacts to wildlife and the riparian corridor remain unmitigated below a threshold of significance. As discussed in the Initial Study, new sources of light associated with the proposed new 10 homes would illuminate the surrounding properties and Grayson Creek; thus, the project CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 11 lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light. Consequently, the applicant is required to implement mitigation measure Aesthetics 1 to reduce impacts on nighttime views. This mitigation requires all outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. These measures ensure that all lights installed on the property will be designed to orient light downward to areas that require lighting. Given that no development is allowed in the creek due to the setback easement, no lighting will be placed there. Some spillover could occur from lighting in the backyard of residences, however, impacts to special-status species have been reviewed in the BRA and no impacts from the lighting are expected. Mitigation Impacts to Grayson Creek The appellant states that mitigation measure Biology 2, which requires tree replanting on the property to mitigate impacts to trees, causes additional impacts to Grayson Creek that are not mitigated or analyzed. The comment questions whether the project would have “direct impacts” on Grayson Creek due to implementation of the mitigation. As addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report responses Francois Comment 4, Shikany Comment 6, Shikany Comment 44, Shikany Comment 45, Mitigation Measures Biology 2, Biology 3, Biology 4, Biology 5, and Biology 8, require tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to nursery sites as well as all nesting, roosting, and dispersing wildlife. These comprehensive mitigations demonstrably reduce impacts to biological resources within the riparian area. They directly address concerns about Grayson Creek, and specifically, Biology 2, which the appellant claims leaves impacts unmitigated, is intended to support the biological resources within the creek's riparian area. The actions required by these mitigations are clearly outlined and were fully considered in the Initial Study. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor would remain largely untouched by implementation of the proposed project, with the exception of construction within 0.21 acre of riparian habitat (necessitating riparian tree removal along its northern boundary) and implementation of a riparian tree planting plan to mitigate impacts to trees. Furthermore, the infill project is surrounded by residential development. Drainage Impacts to Grayson Creek The appellant states that due to diverted stormwater from the project, there will be sedimentation impacts to Grayson Creek that were not discussed in the Initial Study. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 12 As discussed in the Geology and Soils section of the Initial Study, because the proposed project would disturb more than one acre of land, it would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit from the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) and to comply with its conditions and requirements, which are designed to minimize potential erosion issues. The proposed project would comply with the terms of the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and the County Ordinance Code Chapter 1014-4, which requires the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP includes Best Management Plans (BMPs) to ensure reduction of pollutants from construction activities potentially entering surface waters. Additionally, implementation of the SWPPP would also prevent pollutants from entering surrounding water courses in the project vicinity by preventing pollutants from moving off-site. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with Ordinance Code Division 716, Grading. Division 716 of the Ordinance Code provides regulations to ensure that soil would not be stripped and removed from lands, which can create hazards related to subsidence and faulty drainage. It also ensures grading is regulated to control erosion and sedimentation to protect water quality of water courses and water bodies. For example, Article 716-8.8 of the Ordinance Code would require that all erodible cut slopes more than 5 feet in height and fill slopes more than 3 feet in height be protected against erosion by planting with grass or ground cover plants, subject to review and recommendations provided by a County building official. Furthermore, the proposed pr oject would be landscaped and would not leave disturbed soils exposed. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. The Hydrology and Water Quality section of the Initial Study further discusses this issue, stating that the proposed project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the area or change the course of Grayson Creek. In the preliminary stormwater review, the grading pattern of the property will follow the existing drainage pattern and will ultimately connect to an existing drainage located along the northeast side of the project site after the water is detained and treated in a C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter. Accordingly, the proposed project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the site or area or result in substantial erosion or siltation. The additional impervious surface flows will be directed to a single C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter to act as a source control, treating all replaced impervious surfaces prior to connecting to the public storm drain system. No direct storm water discharge would be placed within Grayson Creek. All storm water would be metered and cleaned by the C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter, prior to the indirect discharge into Grayson Creek. Regional Water Quality Control Board Review The appellant commented that an email was received from the Regional Water Quality Control Board during the Zoning Administrator hearing process that stated that the Water Board was in the process of reviewing the Initial Study for the Grayson Creek Subdivision. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 13 The appellant states that the Water Board’s comments should be considered before the project is approved, and that there are potentially flooding concerns with Grayson Creek. The Water Board has yet to review the initial study for the project or provide their comments. The board was notified of the project during circulation of the document, and County staff has reached out to Water Board to follow up on their email comment. Based on conversations with Water Board staff, any concerns are related to potential flood hazard or bank encroachment from the development. County Public Works staff has evaluated the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report for the project, which shows that even in a 100-year storm event, the proposed project runoff would be reduced to at or below existing conditions. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant. Furthermore, development is located away from the creek due to the County’s requirement for a 50-foot creek structure setback. Project Obtainment of Other Agency Permits The appellant states that lack of enforcement to obtain CDFW and WQCB permits results in unmitigated significant impacts. The County is not responsible for enforcing other agencies regulatory authority. That said, the Initial Study does recognize that multiple permits will be necessary from other agencies in order to implement the project. Given that these permits have been discussed with the applicant and are noted in the Initial Study, there is no reason to believe that the required permits would not be obtained. If they are not obtained, the agencies that administer those permits would be able to enforce their permitting authority. Aesthetic, Land Use and Community Character Impacts The appellant states that the due to the project density, it is out of character with the surrounding area, and will have aesthetic and land use impacts. The basis for these is that the project density is higher than surrounding development that is located within unincorporated Contra Costa County. As addressed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator staff report responses Shikany Comment 70, West Comment 1, and in the Initial Study Aesthetics, and Land Use and Planning sections, the project would be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and land uses. The State Legislature passed the State Density Bonus Law to require cities and counties to grant a density bonus and other incentives or concessions to housing development projects in which affordable housing is provided. Consistent with State law, the proposed project’s inclusion of one moderate-income housing unit would allow for a 7 percent increase in density. Development on the project site at this density would be physically precluded by the minimum lot size, lot width, depth, retaining wall setbacks, and front and side yard setbacks for the R-15 zoning designation. As such, these standards would be waived for the proposed project in accordance with State law. It is important to note that the Density Bonus Law establishes mandatory requirements for the County and is entirely CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 14 separate from CEQA. Under the Density Bonus Law, the County is precluded from applying any development standard that would prevent construction of the project unless the County can make specific public health and safety findings. Furthermore, environmental impact concerns resulting from high density development are addressed in the IS/MND. The appellant claims that the County should not consider the residences across the street from the project site when considering if the project is consistent with the neighborhood because these residences are located within the City of Pleasant Hill. In fact, a neighborhood is defined by a group of uses that are within proximity. It would be unreasonable to exclude projects that directly across the street. As discussed in the Zoning Administrator hearings, there is no recognizable difference or separation that would lead a person to believe that the residences on one side of the street should be different from those on the other. Landscaping Mitigation The appellant claims that since the required landscaping plan is not a mitigation measure, it cannot be relied upon to limit aesthetic impacts from the project. While the landscaping plan is a project component and not explicitly listed as a mitigation measure, its inclusion reflects the project's commitment to minimizing aesthetic impacts. As previously addressed in the Zoning Administrator Staff Report response to Shikany Comment 17, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) comprehensively analyzes potential aesthetic impacts. As detailed in the Aesthetics section, the project will comply with all applicable zoning and aesthetic regulations, util izing Density Bonus Law concessions where appropriate. The proposed landscaping plan further enhances the surrounding aesthetic by maintaining adequate screening and privacy. Any remaining differences between the project and nearby, less dense properties are not considered significant environmental impacts. Additionally, Conditions of Approval 19 and 20 require bonding for the landscaping plan, ensuring its implementation. The County has reasonable expectation that this project component will be realized, minimizing the potential for unmitigated aesthetic impacts. Density Bonus Law Interpretation The appellant describes their understanding of the density bonus law and how it should be implemented differently than how the County has interpreted it. They state that they believe that the actual density allowed should be 4 lots. While the appellant offers their interpretation of the State Density Bonus Law and proposes an alternative application, the County's assessment differs significantly. After a comprehensive review, including consultations with the State Department of Housing and Community Development, the administering agency, the County has determined that the project qualifies for the 10 units requested. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 15 The appellant further questions whether the waivers granted to the project are reasonable, and allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law. As stated in the October 2, 2023 Zoning Administrator Staff Report, the Density Bonus Law provides for regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs. (Gov. Code § 65915(d)(1)). The Density Bonus Law puts the burden of rejecting any proposed incentives or concessions on the County and requires the County to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the County makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions; (B) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households; (C) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. Though the appellant states that the project will have impacts on the environment and thus the waivers can be denied, based on the available evidence and the County’s independent judgment, there is no evidence in the record that the waivers granted for the project meet any of these requirements for denial. Thus, the County may not deny these waivers. Accessory Dwelling Units The appellant questions whether Accessory Dwelling Units are part of the proposed project, and states that if they are, they must be analyzed as part of the environmental review. ADUs are not part of the project. The applicant made this clear at the Zoning Administrator hearings and has since submitted revised architectural plans that no longer show ADUs. As explained at the previous hearing, the ADUs were considered at one time during the application process but were later determined to be unnecessary. Noise Impact Evaluation The appellant states that the County’s analysis of noise impacts is inadequate since the project will generate temporary construction noise impacts that are not adequately mitigated. As discussed in the October 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator Staff Report responses Haberman Comment 1, Shikany Comment 75, West Comment 3, and the Initial Study Noise section, the project would include standard conditions of approval that would limit the construction to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. The County restricts construction activities to the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 16 uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. Therefore, restricting construction activity to daytime hours, as well as implementing the b est management noise reduction techniques and practices outlined in Mitigation Measure Noise 1, would ensure that construction noise would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels that would result in annoyance or sleep distur bance of nearby sensitive receptors. Thus, the project is not expected to have significant impacts from temporary noises. Frontage Improvements The appellant states that elimination of a sidewalk creates an unmitigated traffic hazard to pedestrians as well as drivers, and that this should have been mitigated through a mitigation measure identified in the Initial Study. They state that the Zoning Administrator’s added condition of approval to require 150-feet of sidewalk across the street from the subdivision proves that the sidewalk is necessary to reduce a impact to health and safety from the project implementation. The impacts to health and safety related to the installation of frontage improvements was analyzed in the Initial Study and in the October 2, 2023 Zoning Administrator Staff Report response to Shikany Comment 7, Shikany Comment 67, Shikany Comment 76 and West Comment 1. Specifically, The County’s Complete Streets policy requires streets to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right-of-way for each category of users. The IS/MND describes that the proposed project would comply with this requirement. Furthermore, the proposed project qualifies for one exemption or concession from the County pursuant to the Density Bonus Law. The project applicant requested that they provide asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle land striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. The commenter raises concerns, which state that the County can reject a concession request if there would be an adverse impact on public safety. The project frontage is located in excess of 1,000 feet away to the east to the nearest sidewalks. As a result of the isolation, an isolated sidewalk along the project frontage would not provide pedestrians, cyclists, or vehicles with a safer travel experience along Grayson Road. The proposed alternative improvements would provide a safe path for both cyclists and pedestrians. As such, the applicant can legally request this concession, and the County is required to approve it. Furthermore, the concession request for alternative frontage improvements is allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law and can only be rejected if adequate findings are made by the County. Given that the project proposes alternative frontage improvements that provide for reasonably safe pedestrian and bicyclist travel along the project frontage, the County cannot reject the concession requested. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 17 Curb Requirements The appellant comments that the applicant should be required to install concrete curb and gutter along the project frontage. The appellant states that an asphalt curb is not adequate and would deteriorate quickly. Along the project frontage, the project will provide a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping in -lieu of complete frontage improvements. Though the project does not include full frontage improvements, the project would meet the County’s curb and gutter requirements along the project frontage. Private Road Standards The appellant states that granting of an exception to private road standards results jn diminished accessibility and loss of landscaping area in the right of way. The appeal letter goes on to say that it is unclear what is required for the onsite roadway improvements. The onsite roadway improvements will meet the County’s private road standards. No exception has been requested or grated. During the Zoning Administrator hearing process, the Zoning Administrator modified the description of the onsite easement area in the COAs so that the roadway and sidewalk were within the easement area, and the landscape area was not. No changes to the design were proposed and the design is still expected to meet all private roadway requirements. VIII. STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed ten parcels would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in design and density. The infill project layout and access would provide for reasonable development with no significant or adverse effects to the surrounding community or environment. Analysis of individual aspects of the project are provided below: A. State Density Bonus Law Analysis: The State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code §§ 65915-65918) incentivizes the building of affordable housing by granting developers “a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density,” as well as other incentives or concessions, waivers of development standards, and parking ratio reductions in return for a commitment to provide affordable housing as part of a development project. If the developer meets the requirements of section 65915, a city or county must award a density bonus. (Gov. Code, § 65915(b)) The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household (12% CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 18 of 9 base lots), therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915, subdivision (b)(1)(D). By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit (9 du x.07 = 9.63, which rounds up to 10). (Gov. Code, § 65915(f)(4), (5).) The following summarizes the density calculation. Base Density Project Site Gross Acreage: 3.05 Acres Project Site Net Acreage (Excludes Private ROW: 12,866 sq. ft.): 2.76 Net Acres Base Density Calculation: 2.76 Acres x 1.0 to 2.99̅̅̅̅ = 2.76 to 8.28 units. Rounds to 3 to 9 units1. Density Bonus Proposed Percentage Moderate-Income Units: 1 of 9 units = 11.11%. Round up to 12%. Density Bonus Allowed Per Gov. Code Section 65915(f)(4): 7% Max Density Bonus Calc: 9 units + 7% Bonus = 9.63 units. Rounds up to 10 Units. Total Allowable Units: 10 Units In addition to the increased density, the Density Bonus Law provides for regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs. (Gov. Code § 65915(d)(1)). The Density Bonus Law puts the burden of rejecting any proposed incentives or concessions on the County and requires the County to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the County makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of t he following: (A) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions; (B) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households; (C) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. 1 Government Code section 65915, subdivisions (f)(5) states, “All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number.” Additionally, subdivision (q) states that “Each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number.” CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 19 Furthermore, the Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915(e)(1)) states “In no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section.” The applicant has requested waivers of development standards for lot size and setbacks. The applicant has stated that application of these development standards would physically preclude the construction of the project, at its proposed density, as well as the proposed moderate-income unit. At the October 16, 2023 hearing, the Zoning Administrator added a condition of approval that would require sidewalk improvements to fill a sidewalk gap on the opposite side of Grayson Road. This condition of approval would be a partial denial of the concession requested by the applicant but the Zoning Administrator based their decision on the feasibility of the improvement and the fact that is is related to the health and safety. B. General Plan Consistency: The proposed project would conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. As described above, the project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. The density of the proposed project would be 3.62 dwelling units per net acre, which would be deemed consistent with the SL Land Use designation density range of 1 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre as a result of the utilization of a Density Bonus. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. The County’s land use compatibility standards contained in Figure 11-6 of the Noise Element, ambient noise environments are considered normally acceptable for new single-family residential land use development with noise levels ranging up to 60 A- weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)/day/night average sound level (Ldn). Environments with noise levels from 55 dBA to70 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered conditionally acceptable for new single-family land use development; and such development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Environments with noise levels from 70 dBA to 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered normally unacceptable for new single-family land use development, and clearly unacceptable for levels above 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 20 Two noise measurement surveys were taken to determine existing noise levels at the project site. The dominant noise source in the project vicinity was found to be traffic noise on adjacent roadways and lawnmowing. The noise survey documented that existing ambient noise levels on the project site range from 61 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq), as measured at approximately 20 feet from the edge of Grayson Road, to 47 dBA Leq at the project boundary adjoining 2043 Mohawk Drive property. The noise measurement survey files are included in the FCS Draft IS/MND report. These noise measurements were taken during the peak noise hours of the day, and represent the expected highest hourly average noise levels that are experienced on the project site. Resulting 24-hour average noise levels would be even lower when averaged with quieter hours of the day. Therefore, the existing ambient noise environment of the project site is within the conditionally acceptable range for new residential land use development. For conditionally acceptable noise environments, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems, will normally suffice. Based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels, with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for multi-family residential developments would provide 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA or more with windows open. The proposed project will include alternative ventilation systems such as mechanical air conditioning whick will allow windows to remain closed for prolonged periods of time, sufficiently reducing traffic noise levels to meet the interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 61 dBA - 25 dBA = 36 dBA). C. Zoning Consistency: The project would be considered consistent with the R-15 Single- family zoning district as a result of the utilization of the Density Bonus, pursuant to Government Code sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) and County Ordinance Code Section 822-2. The State Density Bonus Law provides for unlimited number of waivers of development standards in order to construct the project at the proposed density. (See Gov. Code, § 65915(b)(1), (e)(1).) Where a development standard would physically prevent the project from being built at the permitted density and with the granted concessions/incentives, the developer may propose to have those standards waived or reduced. The applicant is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 (instead of 100 feet); (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; (d) a reduction in minimum front yard and side yard setback and (e) a waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls. CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 21 The proposed lot sizes, lot width, depth, and setbacks, are shown in the following table. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers as application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit and with the application of the available incentives, concessions, and density bonus. 1024 & 1026 Grayson Rd. Proposed Development Standards (R-15 Standards) Lot # Area ( 15,000 Sq. Ft.) Depth (100 Ft. Min.) Average Width (100 Ft. Min.) Front Yard Setback (20 feet) Side Yard Setback (25 feet aggregate, no yard less than 10 feet) Retaining Walls 6’ or less Lot 1 7,347 87.45 84.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 2 22,460 331 67.85 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 3 15,236 270 56.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 4 14,257 144 99.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 5 14,713 195 75.45 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 6 11,261 163 69.09 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 7 11,360 166 68.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 8 13,388 185 72.37 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 9 13,655 173 78.93 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 0’ CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 22 Lastly, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. D. Traffic and Circulation: Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan requires a traffic impact analysis of any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak period trip generation rates of 1.0 trip per dwelling unit for single-family residences, the proposed project consisting of the ten -lot subdivision, and the future construction of 10 single-family residence (8 net new units) would generate an additional eight AM and eight PM new peak period trips, and therefore, is not required to have a project-specific traffic impact analysis. Since the project would yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, the proposed project would not conflict with the circulation system in the Pleasant Hill area. The proposed subdivision project includes a new 28-foot-wide access road which would permit two 10-foot travel lanes and an 8-foot wide parking on one side of the street. Additionally, a 5-foot wide, monolithic, elevated sidewalk would be constructed adjacent to the new road to provide access for pedestrians and persons with disabilities within the project. Along the project frontage, the project will provide a reconstructed asphalt- concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycl e lane striping in-lieu of complete frontage improvements. The Density Bonus application submitted to the County has requested that the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. Improved frontage improvements are defined as curb, gutter pan, and a sidewalk. No complete frontage improvements exist along the southern portion of Grayson Road, from the intersection of Reliez Valley Road to the west and Heritage Hills Drive to the East (that road segment is in is in excess of 2,000 feet in length). Complete frontage improvements would be prohibitively expensive given the length of the project frontage (354 feet), the required grading, tree removal, and utility requirements. In addition, there is no sidewalk along the southern side of Grayson Road to connect with, in 1,000 feet in feet) Lot 10 14,013 220 63.70 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 23 either direction. The adjacent properties that front along Grayson Road are not expected to develop in the future. Finally, existing Grayson Road has adequate width to support two travel lanes, parking, and a bike lane. Therefore the overall the surrounding circulation system is consistent with the Complete Streets policy. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right of way for each category of users be incorporated into all planning, funding, design, approval, and implementation processes for any construction, reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, operations, alteration, or repair of streets (including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system), except that specific infrastructure for a given category of users may be excluded if an exemption is approved via the process set forth in section C.1 of the policy. The policy applies to both publicly owned roads/land and private developments (or redevelopment areas). Additionally, the County General Plan includes many policies promoting pedestrian and bicycle facilities. As designed, the project would be consistent with this policy. E. Drainage: The proposed project would comply with applicable water quality and discharge requirements. The proposed project would add an estimated 50,825 square feet of new impervious surface area. The C.3 requirements stipulate that projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface must incorporate specific measures to reduce runoff, such as dispersion of runoff to vegetated areas, use of pervious pavement, installation of cisterns, and installation of bioretention facilities or planter boxes. Implementation of these measures would be required as a condition of approval. An existing 24” reenforced concrete pipe within Grayson Road currently collects stormwater runoff from upstream properties. The 24” storm drainpipe connects to 2 6x6 concrete boxes under Grayson Creek and discharges water directly to Grayson Creek. Most runoff on the project site would be directed to a 674-cubic-foot bioretention basin located adjacent to Lot 2 for treatment. Once treated, runoff would be directed to the public storm drainpipe beneath Grayson Road. A portion of the runoff would bypass this treatment system and instead enter the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24-inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff, even in a 100-year storm event. This would ensure that project runoff would not exceed existing conditions. F. Housing Element Compliance – Residential Sites Inventory: California Government Code Section 65863 mandates that no local government action shall reduce, require or permit the reduction of the residential density, or allow development at a lower residential density for any parcel identified in the sites inventory for the adopted Housing Element, unless the local government makes written findings that the reduction is CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 24 consistent with the General Plan, and the remaining sites identified in the Housing Element’s site inventory are adequate to meet the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need. As defined by statute, “a lower residential density” refers to allowing fewer units on the site than were projected within the site inventory of the Housing Element. In order to assess whether this residential development application is subject to requirements of California Government Code section 65863, staff reviewed the site inventory for the adopted 2014 Housing Element and determined that Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 are not among the parcels listed in the inventory of residential sites which were relied upon to meet the County’s share of regional housing needs. IX.ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: the CDFW and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letter were received from individuals. All comments were summarized and responded to in the October 2, 2023 Zoning Administrator hearing staff report for the project. X. CONCLUSION Staff recommends the County Planning Commission deny the appeal of Patrick King, and approve County File #CDSD20-09531, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Attachments: •Findings and Conditions of Approval •Maps •Environmental Review (Comment, IS/MND, MMRP) CPC – January 10, 2024 CDSD20-09531 Page 25 •Photographs •Plans Appeal Letter• FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09531: ANDY BYDE, CALIBR VENTURES (APPLICANT) GRAYSON ROAD LLC (OWNER) FINDINGS I. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffic: Traffic engineers and planners use the concepts of Level of Service (LOS) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) to qualitatively describe traffic conditions. Additionally, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Growth Management Plan, the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Action Plan, and the County of Contra Costa (County) General Plan establish measures of effectiveness and requirements for the analysis and disclosure of circulation impacts associated with new land developments. Potential circulation impacts may be expected, and traffic impact analyses are required for projects that generate more than 100 net new peak-hour trips. A project generating less than 100 peak-hour trips generally will not create or exacerbate any current traffic patterns. Using standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation trip rates, the eight additional housing unit project will generate eight AM and eight PM gross peak-hour trips. At this expected rate, the cumulative effect to local roadways is negligible. Senate Bill (SB) 743 established a change in the metric to be applied for determining traffic impacts associated with development projects. Rather than the delay-based criteria associated with a Level of Service (LOS) analysis, the increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) associated with a project is now the basis for determining impacts. Contra Costa County adopted the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, which includes a VMT policy on June 23, 2020. Pursuant to the County guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and do not require a project specific traffic impact analysis. The project proposes eight additional residential units which is under the County guidelines VMT screening criteria threshold. Therefore, the impacts from the project are expected to be inconsequential. 1. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water quantity can be provided. The subject property is within the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) service area. In an agency comment letter for the project, EBMUD stated that water service for the project could be accommodated. Thus, adequate water quantity is available to the project. 2. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires that new development demonstrate that adequate sanitary sewer service is available. The subject property is within the H. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) service area. In an agency comment letter received from CCCSD, the district stated sanitary sewer service is available for the project and that the proposed project would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity. 3. Fire Protection: The fire protection standards under the GMP require that a fire station be within one and one-half miles of development in urban, suburban and central business CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 2 of 30 district areas, or requires that automatic fire sprinkler systems be installed to satisfy this standard. The project site is within the Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District jurisdiction, and the project requires the Fire District’s review and approval prior to building permits being issued to ensure compliance with all fire codes and regulations. Compliance with all requirements suggests that the project will satisfy the GMP fire protection standards. CCCFPD, has 36 stations serving the County, including two stations within two miles of the project site. The nearest station to the project site is Station 5 at 205 Boyd Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.72 miles from the project site. Thus, sprinklers would be required for the residences on the property. 4. Public Protection: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions of approval will requires that prior to the recording of the parcel map, the owner of the property shall participate in establishing a special tax for the parcel created by this subdivision. The collected tax money will be used to augment existing police services to accommodate for the incremental increase in population as a result of this subdivision project. 5. Parks and Recreation: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions fo approval will requires the project proponent to pay applicable Park Impact in-lieu fees for the new residences. These fees, in conjunction with all other Park Dedication fees collected for development within the County, will be used in part to purchase new park land and upgrade existing community parks as determined appropriate by the Board of Supervisors. 6. Flood Control and Drainage: The project is required to meet collect and convey requirements of the County Subdivision Ordinance Title 9, by constructing the necessary drainage improvements, or obtaining necessary exceptions to the code. The applicant must also comply with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, Title 10, for stormwater treatment. The new drainage improvements will both meet stormwater discharge requirements for stormwater treatment, while also accommodating all rainwater runoff generated by the project, as required by Title 9. Exemptions to allow private maintenance of drainage facilities is appropriate given the necessity of onsite detention. II. Tentative Map Findings 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general plan required by law. Project Finding: The proposed project will conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. The project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 3 of 30 that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. Each of the following factors has also been evaluated and found to be consistent: the extent to which the project is consistent with General Plan policies pertaining to compatibility of land uses; compliance with principles of the Urban Limit Line and Measure C-1990, protection of open spaces; and protection of water quality; and found no evidence of inconsistencies. Additionally, the projected related traffic is not anticipated to negatively affect local traffic patterns or significantly diminish the Level of Service of key intersections in the area or exceed VMT thresholds. The tentative parcel map for this subdivision is consistent with the applicable goals and policies as found in the County 2005-2020 General Plan. Therefore, based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the tentative map is consistent with the County General Plan. 2. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. Project Finding: As required by the conditions of approval, the project does not pose any significant traffic impacts and must comply with the “collect and convey” requirements and design standards for construction of public roads. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant is required to contribute fees for parks and recreation, school districts, child care and police services. Payment of these fees along with compliance with the applicable California Building Code will fulfill all obligations related to construction of the project. Therefore, based on the proposal, no physical circumstances would restrict the developer from completing the project. III. Tree Permit Findings Required Finding: The Zoning Administrator is satisfied that necessary factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree permit have been satisfied. Project Finding: An Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, identified 117 code-protected trees in the project work area. The report recommended removal of 97 trees to accommodate the proposed development and called for the protection of 17 trees with work within their dripline. The Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance states that the director of the department may attach conditions to ensure compliance with the chapter and code. These conditions may include a requirement to replace any or all trees on a comparable ratio of either size or quantity. To meet this requirement the applicant would be required to submit and implement a landscaping and irrigation plan that includes replacement of the trees that have been removed. Trees planted will be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits and will be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, or the maximum that can be practicably accommodated on the site. IV. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 4 of 30 In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an initial study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: California Department of Fish Wildlife and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letters were received from individuals. No additional impacts were identified in these comments and all comments are summarized and responded to in the project staff report. Notice of the proposed project was sent to Native American tribes, as applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1. A Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission, dated October 28, 2015, was used to identify tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. No requests for consultation were received. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD20-09531 1. Approval of the Vesting Tentative Map for a 10 Residential-Lot Subdivision; is generally based on the following documents: • Application and materials received on January 13, 2020; • Revised Project Description Dated March 25, 2022; • Revised Vesting Tentative Map for Subdivision CDSD20-09531, received January 28, 2022; • Architectural Plans received December 15, 2021; • Hydrology And Storm Water Detention Report prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; • Storm Water Control Plan prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 5 of 30 • Grayson Road Inclusionary Housing Plan submitted September 18, 2023; • Grayson Road Density Bonus Proposal submitted September 18, 2023; • Geotechnical Report prepared by ENGEO Incorporated dated October 4, 2019; • Archeological Survey and Historical Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Archaeological/Historical Consultants, dated February 2007; • Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020; • Biological Resource Analysis Addendum prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC., dated December 2022; 2. The concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, is approved, as shown in the Vesting Tentative Map received on January 28, 2022. 3. The waivers to development standards is Approved, as shown on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map received January 28, 2022 to allow: a. A reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; b. A reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; c. A reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and d. Reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks to residences (20 feet to garages), 5-foot side yard setback for residences (with 15- foot aggregate setback), and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls 6 feet tall or less. 4. This permit authorizes the development of ten lots on the subject property as generally identified in the CDSD20-09531 vesting tentative map and documents referenced above. 5. A Tree Permit to allow removal of 97 code-protected trees, and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees, as shown in the Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020, is Approved. Indemnification 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 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 provided 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. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 6 of 30 Application Costs 7. The Major Subdivision application was subject to an initial deposit of $7,525.00 that was paid with the application submittal, plus time and material costs if the application review expenses exceed the initial deposit. Any additional fee due must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit, or 60 days of the effective date of this permit, whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance and final file preparation. Pursuant to Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Resolution Number 2013/340, where a fee payment is over 60 days past due, the application shall be charged interest at a rate of ten percent (10%) from the date of approval. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. Compliance Report Prior to Filing the Parcel Map 8. At least 45 days prior to filing of the Parcel Map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide a permit compliance report to the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) for review and approval. The report shall identify all conditions of approval that are administered by the CDD. The report shall document the measures taken by the applicant to satisfy all relevant conditions. Copies of the permit conditions may be obtained from the CDD. Unless otherwise indicated, the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the applicable conditions of this report prior to filing the Final Map. The permit compliance review is subject to staff time and materials charges, with an initial deposit of $2,000 which shall be paid at the time of submittal of the compliance report. Fencing 9. Prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, a fencing plan program shall be submitted to CDD for the review and approval. The approved program shall be attached to the CC&Rs. CC&Rs 10. Prior to recording the Final Map, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall be submitted to CDD for review and approval. This document shall include the maintenance obligation requirements of Public Works condition(s) of approval. Park Dedication Fees 11. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of Community Development Division (CDD) that all Park Dedication fees have been paid for the subdivision. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 7 of 30 Child Care Fees 12. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of CDD that all child care facility fees have been paid for the subdivision. Police Services Fees 13. Election for Establishment of a Police Services District to Augment Police Services: Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, 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 per parcel annual amount (with appropriate future CPI adjustment) established at the time of voting by the Board of Supervisors. The election to provide for the tax shall be completed prior to filing the Final Map. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of holding the election, payable at the time the election is requested by the owner. Allow a minimum of three to four months for processing. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance 14. The applicant shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, the project proponent shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. Aesthetics 15. Thirty days prior to applying for a building permit for new residence, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: • All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the subject property or road. • Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the subject property. (Mitigation Monitoring (MM) Aesthetics 1) Air Quality 16. The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during the project and shall be included on all construction plans: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 8 of 30 • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material to and from the site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations (MM Air Quality 1) Biological Resources 17. If it is determined that additional native trees can be protected in place while still achieving project objectives (as determined by the project Arborist in coordination with the Construction Manager and the project proponent), the project proponent will determine if additional trees can be saved based upon the potential impacts from the grading to the root structure of the trees by “field-fit” grading activities to the greatest extent practicable to conduct such avoidance. 18. In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. (MM Biology 1) 19. All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non- native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 9 of 30 California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 2) Trees shall be planted prior to requesting a final inspection on the residential building permit for each lot. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to removal of trees or prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a security that is acceptable to the CDD. The bond shall include the amount of the approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security: The County ordinance requires that the applicant pay fees to cover all staff time and material costs of staff for processing the landscape improvement security. At the time of submittal of the security, the applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $200. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree(s) intended to be protected has been damaged, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. 20. Prior to recordation of a final map, a Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of CDD. The Final Landscaping Plan shall include the tree restitution required by CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 10 of 30 Mitigation Measure Biology 2, and be consistent shall conform to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County’s Ordinance, if one is adopted. Prior to final building inspection, a completed WELO Part II – Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to CDD staff for review and approval. All landscaping shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, landscaping plans shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. 21. If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. (MM Biology 3) 22. A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. (MM Biology 4) 23. Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 11 of 30 In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red-legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. (MM Biology 5) 24. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. (MM Biology 6) 25. Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 7) 26. For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special- status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: a. To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 12 of 30 b. Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. c. If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artificial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. (MM Biology 8) 27. During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 13 of 30 Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. f. All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wpcontent- /uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf Cultural Resources 28. All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. (MM Cultural Resources 1) 29. In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: a. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 14 of 30 responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. b. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. (MM Cultural Resources 1) Geotechnical Report 30. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. (MM Geology 1) 31. The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. (MM Geology 2) CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 15 of 30 Noise 32. To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: a. The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. b. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. c. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. d. At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. e. The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. (MM Noise 1) Construction Restrictions and Requirements 33. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the project, the project developer or contractor shall mail a notice to each adjacent residential property providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. 34. The applicant shall comply with the following restrictions and requirements, which shall be stated on the face of the construction drawings: A. Unless approved otherwise via prior authorization from the Zoning Administrator for special circumstances, construction activities are limited to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and are prohibited on the calendar dates that the following state and federal holidays are observed: New Year’s Day (State and Federal) Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. (State and Federal) Washington’s Birthday (Federal) Lincoln’s Birthday (State) Presidents’ Day (State and Federal) Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day (State and Federal) Juneteenth National Independence Day (Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 16 of 30 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 details on the actual date the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal holidays: http://www.opm.gov/fedhol California holidays: http://www.edd.ca.gov/payroll_taxes/State_Holidays.htm B. Transport of heavy equipment and trucks is limited to weekdays between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M., and is prohibited on weekends and the aforementioned state and federal holidays. C. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to adjacent properties. This shall be communicated to project-related contractors. D. Construction equipment and materials shall be stored onsite to the maximum extent practicable. E. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site. F. Any debris found outside the site shall immediately be collected and deposited in appropriate receptacles. G. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers that are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences as possible. Contingency Restitution Should Altered Trees Be Damaged 35. Trees to be Preserved but Altered – Pursuant to the conclusions of the arborist report, proposed improvements within the root zone of trees noted on the site plan to be preserved have been determined to be feasible and still allow for preservation provided that the recommendations of the arborist are followed. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 816- 6.1204 of the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, to address the possibility that construction activity nevertheless damages these trees, the applicant shall provide the County with a security (e.g. bond, cash deposit) to be submitted prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 17 of 30 whichever occurs first, to allow for replacement of trees intended to be preserved that are significantly damaged by construction activity. The security shall be based on: A. Extent of Possible Restitution Improvements – The planting of 17, 15-gallon trees, which shall include California native species. in the vicinity of the affected trees, or equivalent planting contribution, and subject to prior review and approval of CDD. B. Determination of Security Amount: The security shall submitted for each lot and provide for all of the following costs: i. Preparation of landscape/irrigation plan by a licensed landscape architect or arborist, which shall comply with the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County Ordinance, if one is adopted; ii. Labor and materials estimate for planting the potential number of trees and related irrigation improvements that may be required, prepared by a licensed landscape contractor; and iii. An additional 20% of the total of the above amounts to address inflation costs. C. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security – The County Ordinance requires that the applicant cover all time and material costs of staff for processing a tree protection security. The Applicant shall pay an initial fee deposit of $200 at time of submittal of a security. D. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree intended to be protected has been damaged by development activity, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution of the damaged trees, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. Debris Recovery 36. At least 15 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit the developer shall submit Construction Waste Management Plan, which identifies approved methods to comply with CalGreen requirement to recycle and/or salvage for reuse construction and demolition waste materials generated at the jobsite. Prior to Final Inspection, developer shall submit Final Report containing information and supporting documentation of the above-mentioned requirement. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 18 of 30 Steet Names 37. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, proposed name(s) shall be submitted for review by the Department of Conservation and Development, GIS/Mapping Section. Alternate street names should be submitted. The Final Map cannot be certified by CDD without the approved street names. Will Serve Letters 38. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from East Bay Municipal Utility District shall be submitted to CDD. 39. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from Central Contra Costa Sanitary District shall be submitted to CDD. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT (HCI) DIVISION, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21- 09581 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 40. This project is subject to County Ordinance Code, Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Terms and definitions regarding the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance are pursuant to this chapter. Pursuant to Section 822-4.402(b) of the County Ordinance Code, a residential development of five or more for-sale units shall require at least fifteen percent of the for-sale units to be developed and sold as affordable units. At least twenty percent of the inclusionary units shall be sold at an affordable price to lower-income households. The remaining units shall be sold to moderate-income families at an affordable price. For-Sale Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee 41. The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 1.35 affordable units (9 total base units x 0.15 of total = 1.35 units) for the project. The Applicant has submitted an Inclusionary Housing Plan dated March 25, 2022, and proposes constructing one for-sale moderate income inclusionary unit (affordable to households making up to 120% Area Median Income) on Lot 1 of the property. The unit on Lot 1 is an approximately 3,097 square-foot single-family detached home consisting of four bedrooms. The one moderate-income unit proposed for compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements is the same moderate-income unit required for compliance with the Density Bonus request. This unit may be referenced as inclusionary unit, density bonus unit, or both in these conditions. The requirements for the one moderate-income unit must comply with both the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and State Density Bonus law, and the most restrictive requirements would apply. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 19 of 30 The Applicant has proposed to pay a partial in-lieu fee for the fractional 0.35 inclusionary unit, and the County has accepted this proposal. The current calculation of the partial in-lieu fee for the fractional inclusionary unit is $15,444.00. The final calculation of the in-lieu fee will be calculated upon payment. This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferable. A partial in- lieu fee of $15,444.00 will be paid for the fractional .35 unit (.35 = 26% of the fee total of $59,401. 26% of this fee = $15,444.00) Density Bonus Request 42. The Applicant submitted a revised project description which included a density bonus request dated March 25, 2022, which proposed constructing ten percent of the total dwelling units of a housing development where all the units are offered to the public for purchase. The Applicant proposed constructing one moderate-income unit, constituting twelve percent of the total for-sale units in the development. Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant may request one project concession or incentive for providing twelve percent (one unit) for moderate-income units of the total units within the for-sale housing development. The applicant requested the concession to not have to complete frontage improvements. The County accepted the Applicant’s request to not complete frontage improvements. To fully improve the property frontage would result in significant costs that could preclude the construction of the development at its proposed density including the moderate unit. Density Bonus – Reduction in Development Standards Pursuant to Government Code 65915(e), the Applicant proposed a waiver or reduction of the following development standards: • Lot Area – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 15,000 square feet, proposed lot sizes ranges from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. • Lot Width – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 100 feet, the proposed average lot widths range from 56.43 to 99.01 feet. • Lot Depth – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum of 120 feet in depth, the proposed lot depths range from 87.45 to 331 feet. The lot depths for all proposed lots, except Lot 1 comply with the minimum requirements as proposed. • Residence and Retaining Wall Structure Setbacks – where the County Ordinance Code requires all structures meet setback requirements, the proposed residence shall meet a 14 foot front setback except for the garage which shall meet a 20-foot front setback, the residence shall meet a 5-foot side yard setback with a 15-foot aggregate side yard setback, and the proposed retaining wall setbacks for walls 6 feet tall or shorter is 0 feet on all lots. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 20 of 30 Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement 43. At least 90 days before the recordation of the Parcel Map or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first, the Applicant shall execute an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant to Chapter 822-4 Inclusionary Housing, Chapter 822-2 Density Bonus, and Government Code 95915 to ensure that the property will be deed restricted for one unit to be affordable and sold to a moderate income household. This 90-day period allows for the preparation, County approval, and recordation of the Agreement prior to the milestones referenced above. To initiate the County to prepare and execute an Agreement, the Applicant must file a condition of approval compliance review application accompanied by the appropriate fees, documents, and exhibits listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist and/or Density Bonus Plan Checklist. The Agreement must be submitted to the Board of Supervisors before execution by all parties and recordation. The Agreement will establish the process for determining the unit’s maximum affordable sales price, buyer eligibility, and additional program details as referenced in Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and Government Code 65915. A detailed timeline for the project, including the project’s construction, marketing, the Applicant accepting and reviewing applications from qualified households, and the sale of the inclusionary unit. General 44. The following are general terms for granting a density bonus and compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. a. The Applicant hereby represents warrants and covenants that will cause the Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County, California, and other places the County may reasonably request. The Applicant shall pay fees incurred with any such recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the document by the County and before the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first. b. The one inclusionary unit in the project shall be available for sale to members of the general public who are income eligible. The Applicant shall not give preference to any particular class or group of persons in selling the units, except that the units must be sold to a household with income no higher than 120% of the Area Median Income for Contra Costa County as adjusted for family size as defined in Section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code. There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 21 of 30 person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), age (except for lawful senior housing), ancestry, or disability, in the sale of the unit in the project nor shall the Applicant or any person claiming under or through the Applicant, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation concerning the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of homeowners of any unit in connection with employment of persons for construction of the project. c. The County will provide the Applicant with income certification forms to be completed by the potential homebuyers. The income levels of all moderate-income household applicants for the inclusionary/density bonus unit shall be pre-certified by the Applicant (or subsequent holder of the Agreement(s)) prior to submittal to the County for review and approval. d. Upon violating any of the Agreement’s provisions by the Applicant, the County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the breach. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a reasonable period, not longer than thirty (30) days after the date the notice is deemed received, or within such further time as the County determines is necessary to correct the violation, the County may declare a default under the Agreement. Upon declaration of a default or if the County determines that the Applicant has made any misrepresentation in connection with receiving any benefits under this Agreement, the County may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for such relief at law or in equity as may be appropriate. Terms of Affordability 45. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted so that if the home is sold within forty-five (45) years, it must be sold at an affordable sales price to a moderate-income household. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted upon sale to ensure the continued affordability of this unit for the required term of affordability in accordance with Government Code 65915. a. Affordable Sales Price – means a sales price at which a moderate-income household can qualify for the purchase of target units, taking into account available financing, number of bedrooms and therefore, assumed household size, reasonable down payment, and affordable housing costs as defined in Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5. The affordable sales price for moderate income households must not exceed a price affordable to a persons and families whose income is at or below one hundred ten percent AMI. Development Standards 46. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and finished in compliance with the approved Inclusionary Housing Plan. The unit is subject to the standards of Section 822.4.412 of the County Ordinance. a. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and occupied before or concurrently with the market rate units within the same residential development. A hold will be placed on the CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 22 of 30 final inspection/occupancy for all building permits issued within the subdivision to ensure that the inclusionary/density bonus unit meets this requirement. b. The average number of bedrooms for the inclusionary unit must be equivalent to the average number of bedrooms for market-rate units within the same residential development. Marketing and Homebuyer Selection 47. It is anticipated that the Applicant will construct all project units and market them before construction completion. The Applicant shall submit documentation and other information to the County for review and approval at least 90 days prior to construction completion and prior to the Applicant’s request for a final building inspection and final occupancy of the building. The documentation and information required for review and approval are listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist or Density Bonus Plan Checklist and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Marketing Plan b. Homebuyer Selection Plan. The homebuyer selection plan should include a provision for a lottery process for the inclusionary/density bonus unit. c. Marketing Materials, including translated Marketing Materials in Spanish and Chinese. In addition to other marketing efforts proposed by the Applicant in the marketing plan, the inclusionary unit shall be marketed through local, non-profit, social service, faith- based, and other organizations with potential buyers as clients or constituents. Marketing materials shall be made available online for at least one month before the first sale and shared with County Housing staff to promote to its mailing lists. The Applicant shall translate marketing materials, and the marketing plan shall be submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development before marketing the inclusionary housing unit. Marketing may also include publicity through local television and radio stations as well as local newspapers, including the Contra Costa Times, Classified Flea Market, El Mensajero, La Opinion, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily. 48. The developer shall refer all qualified homebuyers to a HUD Homebuyer Counselor prior to the sale of the inclusionary unit. For-Sale Inclusionary/Density Bonus Unit Restrictions 49. The initial sale of a for-sale inclusionary unit shall occur only to a household that meets the following criteria: a. The household has not owned a residence within the previous three years; and CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 23 of 30 b. The household has no more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars in assets. The amount excludes assets reserved for a down payment and closing costs, assets in retirement savings accounts, and medical savings accounts. c. The purchaser of the for-sale inclusionary/density bonus unit must agree to occupy the dwelling unit as their principal residence. d. The term of affordability for the inclusionary/density bonus unit is 45 years. The for-sale inclusionary unit may be resold after the initial sale to a moderate-income purchaser at a moderate-income sales price. If a moderate-income purchaser cannot be found after diligently marketing the unit widely and after a period determined by DCD, the unit may be sold to an above-moderate- income purchaser at a market price, provided that the sale results in a recapture by the County of financial interest in the unit equal to the sum of: The difference between the initial affordable sales price and the appraised market value of the unit at the time of the initial sale; and The County’s proportionate share of any appreciation since the time of the initial sale. Appreciation is the difference between the resale price to the above-moderate-income purchaser and the appraised market value at the initial sale. The County’s proportionate share of appreciation is equal to the percentage by which the initial affordable sales price was less than the appraised market value at the time of the initial sale. Prequalification of Homebuyers and Compliance Review 50. The Applicant is responsible for marketing and prequalifying potential homebuyers for income qualification. The Applicant shall submit for DCD’s review and prequalification prior to the initial sale of the inclusionary/density bonus unit, and the Applicant shall submit to the Department of Conservation and Development for review and approval, all forms, and documentation demonstrating that the buyer of the unit is qualified as a moderate-income household. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection/ occupancy of all building permits associated with the construction of the residences in the project until documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of Conservation and Development. To initiate this prequalification review, the applicant must file a COA Compliance Review Application if there is no open compliance review application for this project. 51. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and Development informed of the contact information of the owner or designee responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be contacted (i.e., mailing addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers) at all times. a. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 24 of 30 development, whichever comes first, and with filing a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the name of the contact representing the property owner for permit compliance and their contact information. b. Should the contact subsequently change (e.g., new designee or owner), within 30 days of the change, the Applicant shall issue a letter to the Department of Conservation and Development with the name of the new party who has been assigned permit compliance responsibility and their contact information. Failure to satisfy this condition may result in the commencement of procedures to revoke the permit. PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION CDSD20-09531 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9, and Title 10 of the Ordinance Code. Any exception(s) must be stipulated in these Conditions of Approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the tentative map submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development on January 28, 2022. COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO FILING OF THE PARCEL MAP. General Requirements 52. 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 vesting tentative map received by the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division, on January 28, 2022. 53. Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted, if necessary, to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, along with review and inspection fees, and secu¬rity for all improvements required by the Ordinance Code for the conditions of approval of this subdivision. Any necessary traffic signing and stripping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division of the Public Works Department and the City of Pleasant Hill as applicable. Roadway Improvements (Grayson Road) 54. The Applicant shall construct frontage improvements along Grayson Road in accordance with the recommendations of the City of Pleasant Hill. The applicant will need to demonstrate that the City of Pleasant Hill approves of the frontage improvements proposed under this project. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 25 of 30 Access to Adjoining Property 55. The Applicant shall furnish proof to the Public Works Department 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. 56. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Pleasant Hill for construction within the limits of the City of Pleasant Hill. 57. The Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved site/development plan. Abutters Rights 58. Applicant shall relinquish abutter’s rights of access along Grayson Road with the exception of the proposed private road intersection. Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance: 59. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the private road intersection with Grayson Road for a design speed of 45 miles per hour. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide sight distance at these driveways. Any new landscaping, signs, fencing, retaining walls, or other obstructions proposed at the driveways shall be setback to ensure that the sight lines are clear. Private Road 60. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system to current County private road standards with a minimum pavement width of 28 feet, with 4.5-foot sidewalk (measured from the face of curb) within a minimum 42-foot access easement. 61. The Applicant shall construct the on-site roadways and the internal road network (serving the residential development) to current County private road standards. Although the proposed on-site roadways are shown as private, the pavement structural section shall conform to County public road standards. 62. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, applicant shall construct a paved turnaround at the end of the proposed private road subject to the review of the Fire District. Street Lights: 63. Property owner(s) shall annex to the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2010-1 formed for Countywide Street Light Financing. Annexation into a street light service area does not include the transfer of ownership and maintenance of street lighting on private roads. Bicycle - Pedestrian Facilities: 64. The Applicant shall design all public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance with Title 24 (for Accessibility) and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This shall include all sidewalks, paths, driveway depressions, and curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 26 of 30 curb returns to accommodate the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4-foot landing on top of any curb ramp proposed. Parking 65. Parking shall be prohibited on one side of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 36 feet and on both sides of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 28 feet. “No Parking” signs shall be installed along these portions of the roads subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department. Utilities/Undergrounding 66. The Applicant shall underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities, including those along the frontage of Grayson Road. Applicant shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground electrical, gas, telephone, cable television and communication conduits and cables including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. The composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans shall be signed by a licensed civil engineer. Drainage Improvements: 67. 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 system which conveys the stormwater to a natural watercourse, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. Applicant shall verify the adequacy at any downstream drainage facility accepting stormwater from this project prior to discharging runoff. If the downstream system(s) is inadequate to handle the existing and project condition for the required design storm event, applicant shall construct improvements to make the system adequate. Applicant shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. 68. The nearest public drainage facility is an existing storm drain located on Grayson Road. Applicant shall verify its adequacy prior to discharging run off. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 69. Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards. 70. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner. Floodplain Management: 71. A portion of the project property lies within a Special Flood Hazard Area (100 year flood boundary) as designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 27 of 30 Rate Maps. The applicant shall be aware of and comply with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (Federal) and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance as they pertain to development and future construction of any structures on this property. Creek Banks and Creek Structure Setbacks: 72. The Property owner shall relinquish "development rights" over that portion of the site that is within the structure setback area of Grayson Creek. The structure setback area shall be determined by using the criteria outlined in Chapter 914 14, "Rights of Way and Setbacks," of the Subdivision Ordinance. "Development rights" shall be conveyed to the County by grant deed. 73. The property owner shall be aware that the creek banks on the site are potentially unstable. The property owner shall execute a recordable agreement with the County which states that the developer and the property owner and the future property owner(s) will hold harmless Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District in the event of damage to the on-site and off-site improvements as a result of creek- bank failure or erosion. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): 74. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (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. Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMPs) for the reduction or elimination of stormwater pollutants. The project design shall incorporate, wherever feasible, the following long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program for the site's stormwater drainage. - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Install approved full trash capture devices on all catch basins (excluding catch basins within bioretention basins) as reviewed and approved by Public Works Department. Trash capture devices shall meet the requirements of the County’s NPDES Permit. - Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain markers. - Construct concrete driveway weakened plane joints at angles to assist in directing run-off to landscaped/pervious areas prior to entering the street curb and gutter. - Distribute public information items regarding the Clean Water Program and lot specific IMPs to buyers. - Other alternatives comparable to the above as approved by Public Works. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 28 of 30 Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance 75. The applicant shall submit a final Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) and a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance Plan (O+M Plan) to the Public Works Department, which shall be reviewed for compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and shall be deemed consistent with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) prior to filing of the Final Map. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant. 76. Improvement plans shall be reviewed to verify consistency with the final SWCP and compliance with Provision C.3 of the County’s NPDES Permit and the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014). 77. Stormwater management facilities shall be subject to inspection by the Public Works Department; all time and materials costs for inspection of stormwater management facilities shall be borne by the applicant. 78. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall enter into a Stormwater Management Facility Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County, in which the property owner(s) shall accept responsibility for and related to the operation and maintenance of the stormwater facilities, and grant access to relevant public agencies for inspection of stormwater management facilities. 79. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall annex the subject property into Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities), which funds responsibilities of Contra Costa County under its NPDES Permit to oversee the ongoing operation and maintenance of stormwater facilities by property owners. 80. Any proposed water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer than 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. Drainage Area Fee Ordinance: 81. The Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 62 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors prior to initiation of the use requested with this application. This fee shall be paid prior to filing of the Final Map. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 29 of 30 ADVISORY NOTES ADVISORY NOTES ARE NOT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; THEY ARE PROVIDED TO ALERT THE APPLICANT TO ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES, STATUTES, AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT. A. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, ASSESSMENTS, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations or exactions required as part of this project approval. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant to Government Code Section 66020 and must be delivered to the Community Development Division within a 90- day period that begins on the date that this project is approved. If the 90th day falls on a day that the Community Development Division is closed, then the protest must be submitted by the end of the next business day. B. Applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Central Contra Costa Areas of Benefit, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Payment is required prior to issuance of a building permit. C. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and Wildlife of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Wildlife Code. D. 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. E. Further development of the parcel may need to comply with the latest Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. This compliance may require a Stormwater Control Plan and an Operations and Maintenance Plan prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. Compliance may also require annexation of the subject property into the Community Facilities District 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities) and entering into a standard Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County. F. This project is subject to the development fees in effect under County Ordinance as December 17, 2020, the date the vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Department of Conservation and Development. These fees are in addition to any other development fees, which may specified in the conditions of approval. G. Additional requirements may be imposed by the following agencies and departments: CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 30 of 30 • Public Works Department • Building Inspection Division • Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District • Health Services Department • Central Contra Costa Sanitary District • East Bay Municipal Utility District The Applicant is strongly encouraged to review these agencies’ requirements prior to continuing with the project. Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. SL General Plan Building Outlines Highways Highways Bay Area Streets General Plan SV (Single Family Residential - Very Low) SL (Single Family Residential - Low) SM (Single Family Residential - Medium) SH (Single Family Residential - High) ML (Multiple Family Residential - Low) MM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium) MH (Multiple Family Residential - High) MV (Multiple Family Residential - Very High) MS (Multiple Family Residential - Very High Special) CC (Congregate Care/Senior Housing) MO (Mobile Home) M-1 (Parker Avenue Mixed Use) M-2 (Downtown/Waterfront Rodeo Mixed Use) M-3 (Pleasant Hill BART Mixed Use) M-4 (Willow Pass Road Mixed Use) M-5 (Willow Pass Road Commercial Mixed Use) M-6 (Bay Point Residential Mixed Use) M-7 (Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Mixed Use) M-8 (Dougherty Valley Village Center Mixed Use) M-9 (Montalvin Manor Mixed Use) M-10 (Willow Pass Business Park Mixed Use) M-11 (Appian Way Mixed Use) M-12 (Triangle Area Mixed Use) M-13 (San Pablo Dam Road Mixed Use) M-14 (Heritage Mixed Use) CO (Commercial) OF (Office) BP (Business Park) LI (Light Industry) HI (Heavy Industry) AL, OIBA (Agricultural Lands & Off Island Bonus Area) CR (Commercial Recreation) ACO (Airport Commercial) LF (Landfill) PS (Public/Semi-Public) PR (Parks and Recreation) OS (Open Space) AL (Agricultural Lands) AC (Agricultural Core) DR (Delta Recreation) Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. R-15 Zoning Building Outlines Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Zoning R-6 (Single Family Residential) R-6, -FH -UE (Flood Hazard and Animal Exclusion) R-6 -SD-1 (Slope Density Hillside Development) R-6 -TOV -K (Tree Obstruction and Kensington) R-6, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-6 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) R-7 (Single Family Residential) R-7 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) R-10 (Single Family Residential) R-10, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-12 (Single Family Residential) R-15 (Single Family Residential) R-20 (Single Family Residential) R-20, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-40 (Single Family Residential) R-40, -FH -UE (Flood Hazard and Animal Exclusion) R-40, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-65 (Single Family Residential) R-100 (Single Family Residential) D-1 (Two Family Residential) D-1 -T (Transitional Combining District) D-1, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) M-12 (Multiple Family Residential) M-12 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) M-17 (Multiple Family Residential) M-29 (Multiple Family Residential) F-R (Forestry Recreational) F-R -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) F-1 (Water Recreational) F-1 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) A-2 (General Agriculture) A-2, -BS (Boat Storage Combining District) A-2, -BS -SG (Boat Storage and Solar Energy Generation) A-2 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) A-2, -FH -SG (Flood Hazard and Solar Energy Generation) A-2 -SD-1 (Slope Density Hillside Development) A-2, -SG (Solar Energy Generation Combining District) A-2 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) A-3 (Heavy Agriculture) A-3 -BS (Boat Storage Combining District) Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Aerial Building Outlines Maintained Roads City Limits Unincorporated Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Maintained Roads Board of Supervisors' Districts Water Bodies County Boundary Bay Area Counties Assessment Parcels Aerials 2019 Red: Band_1 Green: Band_2 Blue: Band_3 World Imagery Low Resolution 15m Imagery High Resolution 60cm Imagery High Resolution 30cm Imagery Citations CEQA IS/MND AND MMRP (LINK) Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 1.Photo taken facing south showing the two-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat at northwestern boundary of Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 2.Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat within the northeastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 3. Photo taken facing west showing riparian woodland habitat within the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 4. Photo taken facing northeast showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 5. Photo taken facing southeast showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat within the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 6. Photo taken facing south showing the single-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat located near the southern boundary of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 7. Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 8. Photo taken facing south showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 9. Photo taken facing southeast showing portion of Grayson Creek. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 10. Photo taken facing southeast showing Grayson Creek and associated riparian woodland corridor. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 11. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland with existing residential structure in the background. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 12. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland habitat in the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD PLEASANT HILL, CA © 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021351 | 12-15-21 Conceptual Streetscene A1 NTS Plan 2 | Modern Farmhouse (R)Plan 1 | Modern FarmhousePlan 2 | Modern Prairie Plan 3 | Modern Prairie (R) A91024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 0 4 8 16 V A L L E YVALLEYV A L L E YVVALLEY VALLEYVALLEYRIDGE RIDGERIDGERIDGEPITCH BREAK5:12 5:12 5:125:128:128:128:128:124:126:126:12VALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEYRIDGERIDGERIDGE RIDGERIDGE 4:12 4:12 4:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:12 VALLEYVALLEYV A L L E Y VALLEYHI PHIPHI P HI P HI P HI P HIPHIPHIPHHIPHIPHIPRIDGE RIDGERRIDGERHI P 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:124:124:124:124:124:124:12 4:12 4:124:12| 2021205 | 04-12-22C 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA. 730 MINERT ROAD SITE WALNUT CREEK, CA 0 2 4 8 A2.2 PLAN 2 Roof Plan Elevation AElevation C Modern FarmhouseSpanish Colonial Elevation B Modern Prairie A81024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-2224682468 POWDER 9'-0" CLG. H.S.308016'-0" x 8'-0" SECT. GAR. DOOR 286824686050 SL 6050 SL GREAT ROOM 13'-0" CLG. H.S. 17'-0" x 18'-2" DINING 9'-0" CLG. H.S. KITCHEN 9'-0" CLG. H.S. PANTRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S.UP3050SH 3050SHFX6050 3050 SH3050SH 3080FR. DOORT.G. 3050 SH 3050 SH 2-CAR GARAGE 20'-2" x 20'-4" DEN / OPT. BDRM. 3 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 11'-8" x 12'-11" PORCH DROP 9'-0" CLG. H.S. ENTRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 2880 43'-6"1'-8"2'-2"17'-5"4'-0"12'-9" 38'-0" 20'-9" 38'-0" 17'-3"43'-6"38'-0"5'-6"8'-2" x 16'-8" 9'-6" x 14'-8" 2668 PR.3050SHSTOR.2668BI-PASS6068 DN2050SH 3050SH4050 SL 3050 SH 3050 SH BDRM. 3 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 11'-8" x 12'-0"2468246824682668BI-PASS60683050SH286824682040SH3068 2468W.I.C. 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 27'-0" L.P. OWNER BDRM. 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 14'-0" x 16'-10"2040SH3050 SH 3050 SH3050SH 2050SH2050SH2050SH2050SHOWNER BATH 9'-0" CLG. H.S. BDRM. 2 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 10'-6" x 11'-2" BATH 2 9'-0" CLG. H.S. LAUNDRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 3050 SH 3050 SH 2040 SH LOFT 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 13'-0" x 13'-0"2040SH39'-0"6'-8"13'-91 2"12'-3"5'-31 2" 38'-0" 25'-0" 38'-0" 13'-0"43'-6"35'-8"5'-6"2'-4"4'-6"43'-6"| 2021205 | 04-12-22C 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA. 730 MINERT ROAD SITE WALNUT CREEK, CA 0 2 4 8 A2.1 PLAN 2 2,498 SF 3 Bdrm|3 Bath|Loft|Den 2-Car Garage Second Floor 1,420 SF First Floor 1,078 SF A101024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 Color Scheme 1 Color Scheme 3Color Scheme 6 A111024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 EXTERIOR MATERIALS:Elevation A - Color Scheme 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 10 CONCRETE SLATE TILE ROOFING INSULATED VINYL WINDOWS FIBERGLASS FRONT DOOR STUCCO STUCCO OVER FOAM TRIM FIBER CEMENT BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING FIBER CEMENT TRIM MANUFACTURED STONE VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE CAP FASCIA SECTIONAL ROLL-UP GARAGE DOOR LIGHT FIXTURE 6 4 3 5 8 9 2 11 12 10 71 11 12 A121024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 EXTERIOR MATERIALS:Elevation B - Color Scheme 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 CONCRETE 'S' TILE ROOFING INSULATED VINYL WINDOWS FIBERGLASS FRONT DOOR STUCCO STUCCO OVER FOAM TRIM DECORATIVE CERAMIC TILE FASCIA SECTIONAL ROLL-UP GARAGE DOOR DECORATIVE METAL LIGHT FIXTURE10 6 3 5 9 4 2 8 10 7 9 1 A131024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 EXTERIOR MATERIALS:Elevation C - Color Scheme 6 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 CONCRETE SHAKE TILE ROOFING INSULATED VINYL WINDOWS FIBERGLASS FRONT DOOR STUCCO STUCCO OVER FOAM TRIM MANUFACTURED BRICK VENEER & CAP FASCIA SECTIONAL ROLL-UP GARAGE DOOR LIGHT FIXTURE9 3 5 6 2 4 8 9 7 1 3050 SH3050SH 16'-0" x 8'-0" SECT. GAR. DOOR 3080FR. DOORPR.T.G.3050SH3050SH2040SH3050SH3050SH30SC801650 SH 3050 SH FX6050 FX40502050SH 2050 SH TEMP. GL. SLIDER80602868 20'-0" x 21'-3"68242480286824802480 2480268018'-0" x 17'-0" 3050 SH3050SH 13'-0" x 11'-0" 12'-10" x 10'-4" 10'-0" x 18'-4" 2040 SH 7'-0"65'-0"48'-0"10'-0"10'-0"18'-6" 45'-0" 12'-6" 13'-7"6'-6"16'-11"7'-0"2'-0"2050SH6'-0"65'-0"45'-0" 14'-0"48'-0"UP 12'-2" x 24'-2" 1-CAR TANDEM GARAGE POWDER 9'-0" CLG. H.S. BDRM. 5 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BATH 3 9'-0" CLG. H.S. DEN 9'-0" CLG. CARPET GREAT ROOM 9'-0" CLG. H.S. DINING 9'-0" CLG. H.S. KITCHEN 9'-0" CLG. H.S. PANTRY 9'-0" CLG. OPT. CALIF. RM. 2-CAR GARAGE 2480 3050 SH 3050 SH3050SH3050SH 3050 SH BI-PASS8080BI-PASS608026802480 BI-PASS50802480268030803050 SH 3050 SH FX3050 14'-0" x 19'-6" FX3050 3050 SH 2040SH26803050SH3050 SH 3050 SH 2680 14'-0" x 17'-4" 11'-9" x 11'-3" 12'-2" x 13'-4"2050SH2050SH2040SH2880 35'-0" L.P. 5050 SL2040SH 11'-0" x 12'-10"2050SH3050SH3050SH2050SHDN BDRM. 2 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BATH 2 9'-0" CLG. H.S. BDRM. 3 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BDRM. 4 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BONUS RM 9'-0" CLG. H.S. LAUNDRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S. MAIN BDRM. 9'-0" CLG. CARPET MAIN BATH 9'-0" CLG. H.S. W.I.C. 9'-0" CLG. CARPET | 2021351 | 11-24-21C 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA. 1024 & 1026 Grayson Road PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 PLAN 3 3,277 SF 5 Bdrm|3.5 Bath|Den|Bonus Room 3-Car Tandem Garage A3.01 Second Floor 1,678 SF First Floor 1,481 SF October25,2023 Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 CONTRA COST.\ CCUM ·y 20230CT 26 AH U: lt3 APPLICATION&. PERM!! CFNTER RE: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, County File #CDSD20-09531 Dear Department of Conservation and Development: The Mohawk/Iroquois NeighborhOOd (hereinafter "Neighborhood"), as represented by the signatories at the end of this letter, is filing an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision to approve the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, County File #CDSD20-09531 (hereinafter "Project'i. This appeal is based on the issues provided in this letter and supported by the previously submitted written and oral public comments on the Project, including the MND. The requisite $250 fee is included with this filing. A more detaUed analysis of many of these issues can be found in written comments submitted to the County throughout the processing of this Project, as well as in oral comments and testimony provided at public hearings, all provided by the letter signatories as well as others in the Neighborhood, and all of which are in the County's possession and are incorporated by reference as part of this filing. tn general, this Project as approved will have significant unmitigated impacts to the environment pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act {CEQA), and to the public health and safety. The mitigated negative declaration (MND) adopted by the County violates CEQA due to inadequate impact analysis and inadequate mitigation which results in unmitigated environmental impacts, a circumstance that cannot occur with an MND and which results in an illegal project approval. Further, CEQA violations constitute a violation of state law, making this project ineligible for the requested concession and waivers that are primarily responsible for the signifiant impacts of this project. We are requesting this project, as currently proposed, be denied. BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS Impacts to oak woodland and riparian woodland are are not fully analyzed. inadequately mitigated. and remain si·gniflcant. Mit~atjon for impacts to sensitjve plants js similarly inadeguate. The MND does not fully analyze nor mitigate impacts to the onsite oak and riparian woodlands as described in the MND comment letter from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and in Neighborhood comments. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 lacks performance .standards (location of planting, timing for planting, survival milestones, monitoring requirements, planting methodology, bonding requirements, etc.) sufficient to demonstrate that the loss of Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County Fite #CDSD2Q-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 2of16 almost 2 acres of oak and mixed woodland and some additionat trees in the riparian woodland will be mitigated below a threshold of significance, an issue also raised by CDFW. Aft of CDFW's recommendations for additional oak woodland impact analysis were not implemented, and recommended mitigation for the Joss of oak woodland habitat was completely dismissed by the County. Without adequate performance standards, the determination of adequate mitigation for oak and riparian woodland and other destroyed trees (158 in total, 97 of which are code protected) has been deferred to a future unknown planting plan, which is illegal pursuant to CEQA. The inadequacy of this mitigation measure is demonstrated by the applicanfs, proposal to inappropriately reestablish 1 ~a acres of destroyed oak and mixed woodland within the existing 1-acre riparian woodland, and by planting isolated trees throughout the site, because project density and waivers leave no other undeveloped area available for planting. Not only has the impact of installing mitigation in the riparian woodland not been been analyzed, this proposal represents an unmitigated net loss of oak woodland. Almost two acres of oak woodland cannot be reestablished in a one-acre exiSting riparian woodland or by scattered trees. Furthermore, this measure requires the trees that will be destroyed in the riparjan woodland to be replaced onsite and in-kind "to the ·greatest extent practicable," meaning if it is not practicable, no mitigation will occur, further contributing to the fact that destruction of oak and riparian woodland is an unmitigated impact. This mitigation measure as written represents inadequate deferred mitigation, is illegal pursuant to CEQA, and leaves the loss of oak and riparian woodland a signifiant environmental impact. Further, the density and . waivers granted to this project foreclose any ability to mitigate these impacts, supporting a denial of the density bonus and waivers. A resident of the Neighborhood adjacent to Grayson Creek had to do work near several code protected trees. To mitigate any potential harm, the County required that he post a bond and replant any lost trees with a minimum 24 gallon tree. This is in contrast to the maximum required 15 gallon trees, which can be reduced to 5 gallons as determined by an arborist. While it may be advisable to plant smaller trees in areas where the roots of other trees could be disturbed, this does not explain why the applicant can plant 15. gallon trees rather than being required to plant larger trees as the Neighbo.rhood resident was required to do. The same situation exists for sensitive plants and Mitigation Measure Biotogy 1 as provided in Neighborhood MND comments. This measure does not provide any hint of how sensitive plants are to be ~tablished once seed or root stook i$ harvested, and considering that every sqyare foot of the Project site outside the riparian woodland wm be disturbed, as will portions of the riparian woodland, and virtually everything outside the creek setback and riparian woodland will be developed, there is no clear way to minimize or avoid impacts to rare plants as called for in the mitigation measure, and no location to replant them. The MND states no rare plants were found at the time the fieldwork was conducted. If sensitive plants were not evident at the time of the fieldwork but had the potentiat to exist on the site, the site clearing ·and filling · that occurred while the project was under ,consideration, a circumstance that should have been revealed in the MND, would have had an impact on these plants and could impact future Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page3of16 preconstruction surveys. Site alteration during project consideration should not have occurred, and should be revealed in the MND. Impacts to sensitive plants remain unmitigated and significant without adequate analysis and mitigation. ·~ Another key aspect of minimizing impacts pursuant to CEQA is avoidance. The MND makes no mention of avoidance as a first approach for minimizing impacts, which could be achieved with a lesser density. Neighborhood MND comments discuss how General Plan policies 8-6 and 8-12 require preservation of the habitats and wildlife impacted by the project. This Project makes absolutely no attempt to preserve any oak woodland habitat and in fact, some of the habitat was removed after project application, but hopefully not before the initial fieldwork for biological assessment was conducted; the timing must be confirmed. It's likely the habitat was removed before the biological assessment was updated in 2022, a circumstance not revealed in the biological assessment, MND or staff report, and should have been. In addition, the County can allow protected tree removal if "reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot." Reasonable development is not synonymous with maximum development. This issue is discussed in the Neighborhood MND comments. The extraordinary number of code protected trees being destroyed violates the above cited General Plan policies, a circumstance that could be avoided with a reasonable Project density. This project should be redesigned with impact avoidance being a primary consideration. A lesser density would result in environmental impact avoidance. At the current density, impacts cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated, requiring the denial of this project pursuant to state housing law and pursuant to CEQA when utilizing an MND. Wildlife and sensitive plant impacts are not adeguately analyzed or mitigated. and remain sign meant. Impacts to wildlife have been an ongoing concern for the Neighborhood. The applicant installed orange construction fencing along the upper portion of the riparian corridor, we believe in the fall of 2020, after which significant brush/understory removal and unpermitted fill occurred, as well as· the removal of a tree that left debris in Grayson Creek that the Neighborhood removed. Since the site clearing ~.e. habitat removal) and the installation of the construction fencing,· the quantity and type of wildlife observed in the Neighborhood has diminished. The work conducted thus far by the applicant, we assume without wildlife or botanical surveys, has already negativeJy impacted wildlife and potentially sensitive · plant species, and the impacts will be heightened once the Project is built. The destruction of habitat with, at this point, no remediation is unacceptable. The loss of wildlife habitat diminishes quality of life certainly for the animals that rely on it, but for the community residents as well. The MND does not fully analyze these impacts and further, relies on the inadequate non-CEQA compliant Mitigation Measure Biology 2 to mitigate impacts to wildlife. As adopted, the mitigation measure does not mitigate the loss of 2 acres of wildlife habitat and therefore does not mitigate wildlife impacts longterm after Project development. Also; if the mitigation measure is ultimately implemented, it will have additional wildlife and creek impacts that are unanalyzed in the MND. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 AppeQI Qf Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 4of16 The MND erroneously assumes au wildlife movement occurs within the riparian corridor. However, Neighborhood observation of wildlife impacts caused by the construction fencing installed by the applicant across an existing wildlife trail, blocking this trait used by wildlife for Grayson Creek and Project site ingress/egress, would point to this not being the case. The Neighborhood, particularly those residents living along , the creek who observe wildlife movement in and along the creek and on the Project site, were never contacted as part of the biological assessment for this project, and should have been. As the Neighborhood has observedl the instaUation of the orange fencing has prevented the natural and historic movement of wildlife through the Project site and along Grayson Creek, a circumstance that wm be exacerbated by the Project. Project impacts to wildlife remain significant. As mentioned above, construction fencing is believed to have been instatled in 2020. Thrs fencing looks to be located within the riparian woodland, and may have required authorization from CDFW; no record of any CDFW authorization exists. Site clearing, fill import and grading on the Project site appears to have occurred in 2021, during the permitting and CEQA review process for the subdivision and without pennits to, our knowledge. This work would appear to have ·occurred after the initial fieldwork was done for the biot.ogical assessment, but before the biological assessment was updated. This timeline must be confirmed, as it could significantly impact the biological impact assessment based on the timing. The baseline circumstances were certainly changed, at least when the biological assessment was updated. This circumstance must be addressed in the MND to clarify what site work was completed and when~ and parti.cutarty when it was completed relative to the preparation of the initial as well as the updated biological assessment. Also, the MND must identify what, if any, impacts occurred as a result of the site work during the Project review period, and any required mitigation for those impacts. Impacts to Grayson Creek are not fully analyzed. the creek setback is not clearly part of the project and is too small, a finding of a less than significant impact is not adequately supported, and impacts to Grayson Creek remain significant. The health of the creek is of utmost concern to the Neighborhood, and is regionally critical. Inadequate set-backs from the creek are a significant issue. While the policy analysis in the MND states there wm be a 50-ft. setback as shown on the plans, that setback is not clear on the plans made available to the public and there is no mention of a 50-ft. setback in the project description as claimed in the County's response to a Neighborhood comment in the, initial staff ~port. Further, there was no analy$iS in the MND that demonstrates how a 50-ft. setback wm sufficiently protect the creek. Comments were made by the County that the lots on the south side of the creek were much closer to the creek, and this was used as justification for a 50-ft. setback as being sufficient. This comparison is not adequate analysis o.f the sufficiency of the proposed setback. Two wrongs do not make a right and further, the fact that there may be lots that are close to the creek on the south side makes it even more important to have larger creek setbacks on the north side, preferably at least 100 feet from the centerline of the creek. Also, the houses on the south side of Grayson Creek were constructed decades ago. Longtime residents of the Neighborhood who live adjacent to the creek have observed creek erosion and Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 5of16 flooding that over the years have resulted in the widening of the channel, reducing setbacks of the existing home8 from the creek. The Creek Structure Setback should have been increased where significant riparian vegetation exists beyond the setback approved for the Project. The reason provided for not increasing the setback atong this clearly important stretch of creek is because of the Density Bonus being granted for this project. In other words, the Density Bonus is directly responsible for signifiant impacts to Grayson Creek that will result from the tack of an adequate setback from the creek for the future homes, which due to their density will have light, noise, and activity disturbance to the creek far · beyond the impacts associated with other less dense development along the creek. Sacrificing Grayson Creek for the dubious "public benefit" of one moderate income home is unacceptable. Development setbacks from the creek should be increased to at least 100feet. There was significant information regarding biological resources submitted by the Neighborhood (Mr. Patrick King, May 31, 2022) during the MND comment period as well as during the public hearing. that would support providlng a setback larger than 50 feet from Grayson Creek. These comments revealed that salmon entered Grayson Creek in 2022, with hope they will return to their natural spawning ground in Briones. Grayson Creek provides the only viable route to Briones, and salmon wilt someday pass along the subject section of Grayson Creek. This section of Grayson Creek is a key, essential habitat area because it creates the only continuous water path that links eastern Briones to the Contra Costa Canal and out to the Sacramento River Delta. There is a wood duck restoration project on this creek as the creek habitat is perfect for the return of wood ducks to Pleasant Hill. There are wood duck boxes directly across the creek and directly adjacent to the Project site. None of this information was incorporated into the MND as it should have been, nor even acknowledged as having been received by the County~ The information submitted to the County includes an extensive list of nesting and migrant bird species that utilize the Project area, noting that almost 100 bird species have been documented along Grayson Creek since 2018 https://ebird.org/hotspot/L9110333? yr=all&m=. The impact analysis for Grayson Creek must consider this information, which should result in the need for a larger creek setback to ensure protection of Grayson Creek. The mitigation to restrict lighting to ''within the project site" does not mitigate impacts from lighting entering the riparian corridor and creek. Grayson Creek is part of the project site, and it can be successfully argued that lighting the riparian corridor would therefore be allowed. Requests to clarify this mitigation me8$ure were dismissed by the County. Therefore, fighting impacts to wildlife and the riparian corridor remain unmitigated below a threshold of significance unless lighting is restricted to only the developed partions of the Project and specifically restricted from entering the riparian woodland and creek. The claim is made in the staff report that no direct impacts (fill or modification) to Grayson Creek will occur. Herein lies an example of the issue with the inadequate and itlegat Mitigation Measure Biology 2, which does not provide any details about how or where replanting of removed trees proposed as mitigation wiH occur. In fact, the applicant is proposing to Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20--09531 Appeal Qf Zoning Administrator Deci$ion October 25, 2023 Page6of 16 inappropriately plant the majority of mitigation trees al'ong the creek in the existing riparian woodland, a direct impact that is not analyzed in the MND. The mitigation planting plan not only does not reestablish 2 acres of oak and mixed woodlandt but it constitutes unidentified unmitigated impacts to Grayson Creek and the riparian woodland it supports, as well as-fill and modification to the creek. Thus, impacts to Grayson Creek remain unanalyzed, unmitigated, and significant. Neighborhood comments .questioned the impact of the Project on the amount of stormwater entering Grayson Creek due to a change in drainage patterns. While the staff report responded with information about volume, no response was provided regarding the impact to the creek from what will likely be redirected and therefore reduced stormwater flows into the creek. Strong winter flows in creeks help keep sediment from building up. The impact of lessened stormwater flows in Grayson Creek was not addressed in the MND as a potentially significant impact. The Regional Water Quality Control Board requested the opportunity to comment on the Project. a request that was received by the County on the day of the continued public hearing. The Board would likely have had input regarding water quaUty and Grayson Creek Project impacts. The Zoning Administrator chose to proceed with project approval without input from the Board after asking the applicant for his thoughts. The applicant agreed with the Zoning Administrator, and opined that he did not need permiS$ion f~m the Board for his project, which is not true. The Project is subject to the Board's Construction Stormwater Program. The applicant will need to seek -Board approval for his required Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required as mitigation, as well as any work the applicant wiH be undertaking in Grayson Creek. The County should seek the necessary input from the Board as part of this appeal. Environmental and CEOA impacts associated with unpermjtted fiH imp-ort and brush removal. The Nei,ghborhood has been commenting regarding -the tree cutting near the creek that occurred, we believe without a permit. Sawdust was deposited and left in the creek, necessitating the neighbors to clean up the mess to restore the creek. We have come to find out that fill was imported into the property in 2021 without a permit, for which a code enforcement case was started in August of 2021; the outcome of the enforcement action is unknown. This occurred after the applicant submitted an application to the County for the subdivision in January of 2020. In addition, it appears that "brush" and likely smaller trees were cleared throughout the property, leaving severat very large pile$ of chips up to6 feet tall. Thi$ raises the question of exactly how large was the brush, what exactly was removed, and whether this work needed a permit for more than just the fill, including ·permits from CDFW and the RWQCB, as wen as from the County. In addition, this raises the question of CEQA baseline.. The applicant had already .submitted a subdivision application when the "brush" and tree removal occurred and when the tm was imported, without permits and presumably without proper wildlife and plant surveys. The initial biologicaf, report fieldwork conducted in early 2.021 according to the report •. presumably before Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 7of16 the site work was conducted; this should be confirmed by the County. The report was updated in 2022, well after all this unpermitted site work was completed, thereby altering the biological baseline after submittal of the project application and biological assessment. This was not a homeowner removi-ng a little brush in the process of maintaining his property. This work occurred during a subdivision permitting process and constitutes unauthorized site work. Neither the initial study/MND, biological report or staff report makes any mention of the unauthorized work, enforcement case, or the altered CEQA baseline, which is unacceptable. This circumstance needs to be addressed. A forensic biological assessment needs to be conducted to determine what habitat was removed from the property. Mitigation for this removal, and appropriate citations, fines or other appropriate rernediatlon for any illegal work, must be completed prior to approval of this project, or at least prior to commencement of any site work. Lack of enforcement to obtain CDEW and BWQCB permits results in unmitigated significant impacts to wildlife and Grayson Creek. Based on infonnation provided by the applicant at the public hearing, it would appear he is unaware of the permits or authorizations that will be required in order to carry out this project. For example, he did not believe he needed any authorization from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, yet the Project requires a permit pursuant to the Board's Construction Stormwater Program, including the requirement to prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP). This requirement is actually a condition of approval. The Project will also require a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSSA) from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (COFW). In fact, biological impact mitigation relies on the applicant obtaining an LSSA to help reduce significant impacts to wildlife, and to Grayson Creek and its associated habitat, yet obtaining the LSSA it is not included as a condition of approval. The conditions of approval do nothing to ensure either of these authorizations will be obtained prior to any work beginning. Whlle mitigation for bio.logical impacts relies on obtaining an LSSA, the need for the applicant to actually obtain this agreement is listed only as an advisory note rather than a r~uirement. Relying on a permit to mitigate impacts, and then not requiring the applicant to obtain the permit, does not constitute adequate mitigation. There is nothing in any of the mitigation measures or conditions of approval that requires obtaining an LSSA. The requirement for a SWPPP is included as Mitigation Measure Biology 6, which according to the MMRP, will be verified during initial reView of construction plan sets and throughout project. However, this may not preclude the applicant from moving forward with removing trees and conducting pre-construction grading and fill as he apparently did previously. It is vital th~t both of these authorizations be obtained prior to any site work occurring, including but not limited to tree removal or ground disturbing work occurring on the Project site. Mitigation as adopted by the County relies on these authorizations. so the County must be responsible for documenting that the authorizations are received, are on file with the County. and in fact adequately mitigate the impacts they were cited as mitigating in the MND. Therefore, in order to ensure impacts to biological resources and water quality are reduced below a Grayson Road 10•Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal Qf Zoning Administrator Deci~ion October 25, 2023 Page Sot 16 threshold of significance, a condition of approval or mitigation measure must be added requiring the applicant to obtain these authorizations and provide copies to the County prior to any site work being done on the Project site, · inctuding but not limited to tree or any other vegetation removal and any work that disturbs the ground. LAND USE, AESTHETIOS, COMMUNITY CHARACTER The Pro ject is in consistent with its surrou ndings. res ultin g in significant aesthetic . land use and community character impacts. The size, scale and density of the Project is inconsistent with the County neighborhoods surrounding the project on the south side of Grayson Road. Aesthetic and land use impacts, and the inconsistency of this project with its surrounding community character, cannot be found to be mitigated below a threshold of significance. The extraordinary extent of the development standards waivers being granted to the applicant is a clear indication of these incompatibilities, as no other development in the surrounding area of the project utilizes these reduced standards. Those of us who live in the neighborhood, many of us for decades, chose to live here because· it is a peaceful, beauti,ful suburban/rural hybrid neighborhood that is also cfose to downtown. with large lots and room between neighbors, rolling hills, open space, privacy, natural habitat and lots of wildlife. The proposed development is completely contrary to these qualities. The development size . and density is inappropriate for the surrounding community, with too many homes on too small of lots; and with the majority of the mature naturat habitat on the Project site destroyed and wildlife displaced. Fewer homes would be in keeping with the "flavor" of the surrounding commu.nity. Aesthetic, land use and community character impacts remain unmitigated and significant due to the density bonus and waivers granted for this Project The Nei;ghborhood has submitted numerous comments providing factual information that demonstrates this project is compfetely inconsistent with its surroundings when considering usable · lot size, development scale~ development density, and aesthetics. Any reasonable person can look at this ·area of Contra Costa County to see thi.s project will look nothing Uke anything else surrounding it in the County; rather, it will stand out in a very negative way. The project is too dense and the homes are too large and too dose together. The small lots in the area of Pleasant HUI across the street or near Taylor Blvd. cannot be used to determine consistency~ as they are in urban Pleasant Hill, and were created as a PUD with significant open space. The Project site is located in a relatively rural, low density area of the County, not high density urban Pleasant Hill. The County claims that the aesthetic, community character and land use (density, etc.) impacts associated of this development, including the removal of 158 mature trees that have taken decades to mature· (97 of which are code protected) and the installation of an· almost solid wall of giant two-story boxy homes, will be mitigated by a landscaping plan that will supposedly "enhance the aestheti.c character to maintain adequate screening and privacy." This is a false· Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page9of 16 claim that cannot be substantiated. There is no mitigation. included for the Project that requires a landscaping plan with adequate performance standards sufficient to support this claim. This means determining adequate mitigat;on for screening and privacy is being deferred to some future plant contrary to CEQA requirements. Further, trees to be planted as mitigation for the complete destruction of almost two acres of oak woodland will take decades to grow to a point that they would provide the screening and privacy (and habitat) provided by the mature trees currently existing on the site, if the trees to be planted even survive, keeping in mind there is no place to plant these trees that constitutes restoration of the oak woodland. The County has misrepresented and downplayed this impact issue in an attempt to find neighborhood/ community character consistency and as a consequence, formed erroneous consistency conclusions that leaves aesthetic, community character and land use impacts significant. The Neighborhood has continually commented about the excessive density of the Project resulting from the use of the density bonus allowance and inappropriate waivers granted that are supposedly allowed by state housing law, all of which result in unmitigated significant impacts as discussed throughout this letter and previous Neighborhood comments. A reduction in density to what should be no more than four lots would contribute significantly toward mitigating the significant impacts of this project that are discussed in this letter and have been commented on throughout the Project permitting process. This lesser density would allow avoidance of impacts to existing habitat and the wildlife it supports, and would result in a devetopment in keeping with the aesthetics, character, and land use of the surrounding community. To summarize our understanding of the housing law situation for the Project, the applicant is using the inclusion of a single moderate income home (one of the two smallest homes, and located on the smallest lot in the worst location in the subdivision) as a toot to allow him to claim a density bonus and increase the reasonable density that would otherwise be aflowed on this property by 150%; and to allow him to ctaim financial infeasibility of the project without the requested waivers and concession that together with the increased density are primarily responsible for the signifiant environmental impacts of this project, and that will result in financial benefits to the applicant in the neighborhood of what is likely hundreds of thousands of dollars while shifting his waived financial development responsibilities and environmental costs of project impacts to the community and taxpayers, an without being required to provide any evidence of his financial feasibility claims~ While the County has explained state housing law as justification for their decisions regarding the Project, the resulting extraordinary benefits to the applicant and the extraordinary environmental, financial, health and safety, and community impacts and costs have not been adequately acknowledged and characterized. The community is entitled to this information, and the County should provide a discussion that explains it. State housing law defines "density bonus" as a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density. A reasonable interpretation of maximum allowable gross residential density would be the maximum density allowed under all County development regu1ations, that fs, density based on acreage that can actually be developed with residential uses. However, the state apparently calculates maximum allowable gross residential density using gross acreage, regardless of whether or not the acreage can be developed. For this Grayson Road 1(}.Lot Subdivision County Fite #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 10of16 project, this means the Grayson Creek setback for which development rights will be conveyed to the County~ and the access road, are included in the Project density calculations. This property shoufd have been divided into no more than 4 lots · considering net acreage to accommodate the creek setback area and access road, leaving a substantial protective creek buffer and likely the majority of the existing oak woodland. Instead, the applicant i$ utmzing state housing laws by providing a single moderate income home as a toot to increase the density allowed on this p.roperty by 150%. from 4 lots that would have· been consist.ant with the neighboring area, to 10 lots consistent with development in urban downtown Pleasant Hill. Calcutatlons to support this are provided in Neighborhood 2023 MND comments. The excessive density of this project is primarily responsible for the unmitigated environmental, community, and public health and safety impacts of this Project. The density must be reduced to avoid unmitigated impacts to Grayson Creek, the valuable oak woodland and riparian habitat on the Project site, and the community character · of this part of the County. Without the excessive density, the waivers that add to the impacts wou1d not be needed. Due to the density of the Project and the resulting impacts, it should be denied. The granting of numerous waivers to the County's development regulations signj:ficantly contributes to the . unmitig,ated significant impacts of this project, and in . some cases is not reguired to pb~jcally develop the Project. The staff rePQrt cQntains the following: Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code§ 65915(e)(1)) states "In no case may a ci~ county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding ~e construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision {b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section." (emphasis added). The staff. report further notes that the applicant has requested waivers of development standards for lot .size and setbacks, and has stated that application of these development standards would physi:calty preclude the construction of the ·project at its proposed density, as well as the· proposed moderate-income unit. The moderate income home is not responsible for creating the need for Waivers of lot size or setbacks. Even at nine tots( a reduction in tot size would be required, evidence of the excessive density proposed by this Project Thus, the tenth rot awarded to the Project as a Density Bonus, is not responsible for the need for a reduced lot size. Further, the need for reduced setbacks for the futu.ra homes is unjustified pursuant to state housing law. The lots can clearly be physically developed with reasonably sized homes, homes consistent in size with the surrounding neighborhood that would not require setback waivers. The applicant stated that the. County's development standards would physically preclude construction of the project, which is clearly not the case. The applicant is choosing to construct giant homes, a choice that should be refused by the County by denying unnecessary setback waivers. If there is some other reason these large homes are being proposed and waivers are being granted to accommodate them, this shoutd clearty be explained to the public in the: MND and staff report. For exarnpfe, if the applicant is justifying the size of these homes and the need for waivers because of an unsubstantiated claim of the financial feasibility of the project, the public should be informed of Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 11of16 this claim. Regardless, the waivers should be denied as they are not physically required. Applying standard setbacks would help somewhat in reducing the impacts of this giant wall of two-story boxy homes that will be built almost on top of each other, although aesthetic, community character and biological impacts~ will never be reduced below a threshold of significance at the proposed density of the Project The inclusion of Accessory Dwelling Units fADUs) in the Project js unclear: Project plans indicate 6 lots will contain homes with ADUs. Despite the County and the applicant insisting that no ADUs are included in the Project, the project plans that were approved (the plans included in the staff report) included ADUs. We asked to have language added to the Project description that excluded AOUs in the Project, or to have the plans revised to eliminate the AOUs, but we are not aware that either occurred. Therefore, we presume that ADUs are included in the project without any analysis of these ADUs in the MND. The inclusion of these 6 ADUs in a project that is already far too dense increases the environmental and health and safety impacts of the project with more traffic, more fighting, more noise, and simply more activity. Given the lenient stance of the state when it comes to adding AOUs, the Project could increase even further the number of ADUs that could be added in the future. As this appeal has argued, this project as proposed should not be approved. lf the County continues to recommend approvalf that approval should include a restriction that disallows any ADUs on these ten lots, considering the already excessive size, scale and density of the Project and the sensitivity of Grayson Creek and remaining associated habitat. Noncompliance with state law and unmitigated impacts to the environment and public health and safety. Following is an excerpt from the staff :report: The Density Bonus Law puts the burden of rejecting any proposed incentives or concessions on the County and requires the County to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the County makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions; {B) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific. adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordabte to low-income and moderate-income households; (C) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. Grayson Road 1 O•Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 12of16 It is clear that the applicant's and County's interpretation of housing law is resulting in a Project with significant unmlttgated impacts to public health and safety and to the environment, including biological and public trust resource impacts; and aesthetic, community .character land use, and traffic impacts, aH due to the Project's excessively high density a.nd numerous concessions and waivers. The pmjeot as proposed violates CEQA, a state law, due to mitigation not compliant with CEQA B$ well due to unmitigated significant environmental Project impacts, a circumstanc.e which is not allowed for an MND. The project also has unmitigated public health and safety impacts .. Signifiant Project impacts are directly associated with the density bonus, concession and waivers which create a Project with a size, scale and density that does not allow for adeqt.1ate mitigation, such as reestablishment of lost oak woodland and a creek setback that would sufficiently protect Grayson Creek from residential activity associated with the excessively large homes that are proposed. This project should therefore be denied, and redesigned at a lower density. NOISE Noise is inappropriately noted as less than significant, and confUcts in conditions of agproval could result in significant noise impacts. Construction noise has the potential to disturb surrounding neighbors for a significant period .of time, given the number and size of the proposed homes together with the construction of streets and utilities and the destruction of trees and understory that attenuate noise. Mitigation Measure Noise 1 is proposed to reduce construction noise, yet the initial study shows temporary or permanent noise as less than significant without mitigation. This is conflicting, and needs to be corrected, althQugh noise impacts may require additional mitrgatic:>n due to insufficient MND analysis. The MNO inappropriately found per Noise 1 that it was acceptable to disturb the Neighborhood with construction noise from 7:00 AM until 7:00 PM weekdays. and from a.:oo AM until 7:00 PM on Saturdays. The County adopted these hours of operation in the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) as Mitigation Measure Noise 1. Mitigation measures adopted in an MMRP are conditions of approval for a project. The County also adopted a more restrictive condition of approval that requires that, unless approved otherwise via prior authorization from the ZQniog Administrator for special circumstances, construction activities are limited tQ the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and on specific holidays. Both these sets of requirements are conditions of apprc>val, yet are clearly inconsistent. This creates confusion, potential vulnerability on the part of the County to challenges regarding which condition applies. and could ultimately , impact the Neighborhood whose residents will suffer from all the noise resulting from the Project if Mitigation Measure Noise 1 is enforced in lieu of the more restrictive County condition of approval. The MMRP must be mQdifiect to be consistent with the County's more restrictive condition of approval, or the MND must find that noise has not been mitigated below a threshold of significance since the MMRP hours of Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision October 25, 2023 Page 13of16 operation are clearly unacceptable for a currently quiet neighborhood and do not mitigate construction noise impacts below a threshold of significance. The Project site is zoned for residential use, and although there are two existing homes, the homes have not been occupied for years. Therefore, the baseline for residential noise being generated by this property i$ zero. A subdivision creating a reasonable number of homes o.e. 4 homes) would generate residential noise that would presumably be at a level that would be expected and acceptable. as this number of homes would mean noise consistent with noise generated by surrounding homes that exist at a similar density. size and scale, and noise that would be attenuated by the retention of significantly more mature trees and other vegetation. The street noise from Grayson Road has audibly increased into our Neighborhood since the pre- construction site clearing occurred. Our neighborhood's peace and enjoyment have already been negatively impacted by this vegetation removal. This increase in noise will be significantly exacerbated by removal of 158 mature trees, and the addition of ten very large homes within a concentrated area that constitute more than twice the number of homes then could reasonabry be constructed on the property absent the applicant's and County's reliance on state housing regulations to justify the unacceptable density of this Project. The analysis of the noise that will impact our neighborhood . and surrounding neighborhoods did not address or analyze any of these circumstances. The analysis needs to be amended, and potentially additional mitigation added, in order to find that noise impacts are mitigated below a threshold of significance. TRANSPORATION The Project sybstantially increases traffic hazards due to noncompliance wjth County standards and poses an unmjtjgated significant jmpact to the public health and safety. The applicant is using the inclusion of one moderate income home as a tool to avoid his obligation to construct Grayson Road frontage improvements. This includes two key issues as proposed by the applicant .. the elimination of a sidewalk, and the construction of an asphalt curb rather than the normally required concrete curb. Elimination of a sidewalk in light . of the number and size of homes the applicant is proposing that will likely house a significant number of children, coupled with the excessive speed of the cars traveling up and down Grayson as witnessed and acknowledged by the Zoning Administrator, creates an unmitigated traffic hazard to pedestrians as well as drivers, and an unmitigated impact to pubic health and safety as the Neighborhood has argued in written and oral comments. To address this impact, the Zoning Administrator at the October 16, 2023 public hearing, added a condition of approval to the Project that requires the applicant to construct a 150-ft. infill section of sidewalk on the north side of Grayson, requiring a minor amount of effort and expense on the part of the applicant as compared to what he should actually be required to construct, or at the very least bond for so the County can construct any Grayson Road 1 Oo.;Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Deci$ion October 25~ 2023 Page 14of 16 necessary improvements in the future·. When asked if the applicant was agreeable to constructing this infi.U section of sidewalk, he answered that he was not The addition of this short section of sidewalk across Grayson raises questions as to whether this is adequate mitigation for the impacts generated by the Project Normally, MNDs cannot be circulated l1nle$S the applicant has agreed to proposed mitigation. In this case, the requirement was added at a public hearing and the applicant said he would not agree to it. Further, the public had no opportunity to provide input or ask questions about the proposed mitigation since it was added after the public heating was closed. The applicant must agree to the construction of this section of sidewalk in order to utilize an MNO to mitigate the pubUc safety transportation hazard created by the applicantJs proposal of no sidewalk. However, even if the applicant agrees to the mitigation, constructing a sidewafk across Grayson from the Project does not fully mitigate the significant traffic and pubnc health and safety impact because there is no safe way to access the sidewalk. Considering the speed of the traffic on Grayson, crossing Grayson ·can be challenging and unsafe, particularly at certain times of the day such as peak traffic times. Therefore, the applicant must be required to provide amenities that will create a safe way for the residents of the Project to cross Grayson to the north side in order to utilize the sidewalk. This could include a crosswalk with flashing lights that are activated ·when someone wants to cross, or a stop sign near the new .access road intersection .. A stop sign would also serve to stop traffic near the curve in Grayson that limits traffic visibifrty from Mohawk, and will atso slow down traffic on Grayson~ an of which would help mitigate the already chaHenging task of turning out of Mohawk onto Grayson that will be made more difficult by the additional traffic that will result from this Project. Without a safe way to cross Grayson, traffic and public health and safety impacts remain significant. Asphalt concrete curb on Grayson js not sufficient. The applicant is proposing to install an asphalt concrete curb along the Project's Grayson frontage in lieu of the normally required concrete ourb, gutter and sidewalk. The existing curb and gutter on the south side of Grayson from Taylor Blvd. to Release Valley Road are concrete except at this one property. Therefore, the Project should be conditioned to require a concrete curb and gutter along the entire Grayson frontage. An asphalt curb wm not last, and as it. deteriorates, will result in drainage issues. With the number and size of the proposed homes ~oupled with the limited parking on the access · road, parking wiH undoubtedly occur on Grayson, further contributing to the deterioration of an asphalt curb due to cars rt;lnning over it. The applicant should be required to construct. a concrete curb and gutter to be consistent with other curb and gutter on the south side of Grayson, and to minimize drainage impacts that would result from the deterioration of an asphalt curb. · Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDS020.:.09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator DE:teision October 25, 2023 Page 15of16 Granting of an exception to private roact standards constiMes yet another waiver of Coynty standan:ts. and results jn diminished accessibility and loss of landscapjng area jn the right of way,. Confusion remains regarding the private road access for this Project. The MND and staff report identify the road as being 28 feet wide, with conflicting sidewalk widths of 4.5 and · 5 feet identified in the staff report and Project information, and a 42-ft. right of way. The Project condition of approval included in the staff report stated that per the Vesting Tentative Map, Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system to current County private road standards with a minimum pavement width of 28 feet, with 4.5-foot sidewalk (measured from the face of curb) within a minimum 42-foot access easement. However, as part of the Project approval, the Zoning Administrator, after the ctose of the public hearing, agreed to the applicant's request to narrow the right of way to 33 feet. When asked after the meeting what exactly was involved with this change, the County has yet to provide us with a clear answer. We were last told that as a result of the change made at the hearing, the road width had been increased to 30 feet, the sidewalk was decreased to 3 feet, and the right of way was reduced to 33 feet. but we were referred to Public Works for clarification, which after sending two emails requesting clarificatfon, we have yet to receive. With a right of way reduced to 33 feet, there would be no room for landscaping within the right of way as proposed by the Project description. The Project description states the Project would be accessible, yet is now proposing a 3-ft. sidewalk along the access road where a 4-ft. sidewalk would be required for accessibitity. Further, this change represents yet another waiver of standard County requirements that was not advertised to the public, and was made after the close of the public hearing which foreclosed any ability of the public to understand the change, question it, or object to it. This is unacceptable, and requires the County to clearly address this change and allow public input prior to approval of the project. We hope you have come to understand how much the Neighborhood values our homes, our neighborhood, and our beautiful and peaceful environs that include wildlife, sensitive habitats. and Grayson Creek, all of which contribute to the health of our local and regional environment and community. Is it really worth destroying these assets for the sake of one moderate income home? We do not believe it is. We also hope you understand we are not opposed to development of the Project site in a reasonable manner that respects the environment, the neighborhood. and the community. We are asking the County to have the same respect when considering approval of this damaging Project, and deny the Project. We encourage you to contact us if you have any questions. Please keep us informed regarding the progress and status of this appeal. Thank you for your consideration of this appeal. Sincerely, The Mohawk/Iroquois Neighborhood · Grayson Road ·10-Lot SubdMsion County File #CDSD20-09531 Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision SUBMITTED BY: NAME SIGNATURE .t;~MZA MJ~ ~ANCoJ S ..,,-- .i::::: --:::. ..... ~ ~. ~ -;:Jt, . ~ . ~ ' ~\ct,n t:rtt "1 r ;~ _,;;_:/L~ ~ "''/ ........_ I ADDRESS IN P.H. ~OlJ1~~ p~~~M October 25, 2023 Page 16of16 _C. EMAIL ADDRESS "S..n.4., ~Mµt °'"ff-~6c_c:,) nb-JL. ~ tze,4.j-Moh awkd ~P~%c~ t\~\Lr:A -&r\~ t:--~.,,,o·i~ ~h ln h11 \ • ".d- ' J -- .! Department of Conservation and Development County Zoning Administrator Monday, October 16, 2023 – 1:30 P.M. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item #_____ Project Title: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File Number: #CDSD20-09531 Applicant: Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde Owner: Grayson Road LLC Zoning/General Plan: R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District / Single-Family Residential Low Density (SL) Site Address/Location: 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 (APNs: 166- 030-001 and 166-030-002) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared which indicates that there will be no significant environmental impact as a result of the project. Project Planner: Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP, (925) 655-2872 Staff Recommendation: Approve (See Section II for Full Recommendation) I. PROJECT SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. The residence on Lot 1 would be restricted for sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions pursuant to the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. The project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow average lot widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction ZA – October 16, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 2 in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced structure setback requirements. The project is also seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees. II. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Zoning Administrator: A. FIND that on the basis of the whole record before the County (Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553), that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project reflects the County’s independent judgment and analysis; B. ADOPT the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) prepared for the project; C. APPROVE the Vesting Tentative Map received January 28, 2022, by the Department of Conservation and Development, Current Planning Division; D. APPROVE the attached findings and conditions of approval prepared for this project; and E. DIRECT Staff to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. III. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The subject property is located within the Single-Family Residential Low Density (SL) General Plan land use designation. B. Zoning: The subject property is located within the R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District. C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance: On March 24, 2023, an Initial Study was prepared for the project, and posted and circulated for public review. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was found that the project would not result in any significant environmental impacts. Comments regarding the adequacy of the review were received within the comment period and are discussion of the issues raised is provided in Section VIII below. ZA – October 16, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 3 IV. BACKGROUND The Zoning Administrator heard the project at their October 2, 2023, meeting. Following a presentation by the applicant and comments from the public, the Zoning Administrator continued the item to an open hearing on October 16, 2023, to allow for additional time to review the submitted comments and project details. At the hearing, the applicant requested multiple modifications to the recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff has modified Condition of Approval #3 and #42 to clarify that the approved waivers include reduced side yard setback requirements for the residence. Conditions of Approval 54, 59, 60 and 66 are Public Works conditions of approval and are under review by that department. V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021-square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. Running southwest to northwest along the southern boundary of the project site is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek. The proposed project does not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees. The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit. In addition to the increased density of one unit (10 units total), the project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced structure setback requirements to allow 14-foot front setback, 5-foot side yard setback for ZA – October 16, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 4 residences, and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. VI. CONCLUSION Staff recommends the Zoning Administrator approve County File #CDSD20-09531, based on the attached findings, and subject to the attached conditions of approval. Attachments: • Findings and Conditions of Approval FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09531: ANDY BYDE, CALIBR VENTURES (APPLICANT) GRAYSON ROAD LLC (OWNER) FINDINGS I. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffic: Traffic engineers and planners use the concepts of Level of Service (LOS) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) to qualitatively describe traffic conditions. Additionally, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Growth Management Plan, the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Action Plan, and the County of Contra Costa (County) General Plan establish measures of effectiveness and requirements for the analysis and disclosure of circulation impacts associated with new land developments. Potential circulation impacts may be expected, and traffic impact analyses are required for projects that generate more than 100 net new peak-hour trips. A project generating less than 100 peak-hour trips generally will not create or exacerbate any current traffic patterns. Using standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation trip rates, the eight additional housing unit project will generate eight AM and eight PM gross peak-hour trips. At this expected rate, the cumulative effect to local roadways is negligible. Senate Bill (SB) 743 established a change in the metric to be applied for determining traffic impacts associated with development projects. Rather than the delay-based criteria associated with a Level of Service (LOS) analysis, the increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) associated with a project is now the basis for determining impacts. Contra Costa County adopted the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, which includes a VMT policy on June 23, 2020. Pursuant to the County guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and do not require a project specific traffic impact analysis. The project proposes eight additional residential units which is under the County guidelines VMT screening criteria threshold. Therefore, the impacts from the project are expected to be inconsequential. 1. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water quantity can be provided. The subject property is within the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) service area. In an agency comment letter for the project, EBMUD stated that water service for the project could be accommodated. Thus, adequate water quantity is available to the project. 2. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires that new development demonstrate that adequate sanitary sewer service is available. The subject property is within the H. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) service area. In an agency comment letter received from CCCSD, the district stated sanitary sewer service is available for the project and that the proposed project would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity. 3. Fire Protection: The fire protection standards under the GMP require that a fire station be within one and one-half miles of development in urban, suburban and central business CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 2 of 30 district areas, or requires that automatic fire sprinkler systems be installed to satisfy this standard. The project site is within the Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District jurisdiction, and the project requires the Fire District’s review and approval prior to building permits being issued to ensure compliance with all fire codes and regulations. Compliance with all requirements suggests that the project will satisfy the GMP fire protection standards. CCCFPD, has 36 stations serving the County, including two stations within two miles of the project site. The nearest station to the project site is Station 5 at 205 Boyd Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.72 miles from the project site. Thus, sprinklers would be required for the residences on the property. 4. Public Protection: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions of approval will requires that prior to the recording of the parcel map, the owner of the property shall participate in establishing a special tax for the parcel created by this subdivision. The collected tax money will be used to augment existing police services to accommodate for the incremental increase in population as a result of this subdivision project. 5. Parks and Recreation: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions fo approval will requires the project proponent to pay applicable Park Impact in-lieu fees for the new residences. These fees, in conjunction with all other Park Dedication fees collected for development within the County, will be used in part to purchase new park land and upgrade existing community parks as determined appropriate by the Board of Supervisors. 6. Flood Control and Drainage: The project is required to meet collect and convey requirements of the County Subdivision Ordinance Title 9, by constructing the necessary drainage improvements, or obtaining necessary exceptions to the code. The applicant must also comply with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, Title 10, for stormwater treatment. The new drainage improvements will both meet stormwater discharge requirements for stormwater treatment, while also accommodating all rainwater runoff generated by the project, as required by Title 9. Exemptions to allow private maintenance of drainage facilities is appropriate given the necessity of onsite detention. II. Tentative Map Findings 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general plan required by law. Project Finding: The proposed project will conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. The project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 3 of 30 that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. Each of the following factors has also been evaluated and found to be consistent: the extent to which the project is consistent with General Plan policies pertaining to compatibility of land uses; compliance with principles of the Urban Limit Line and Measure C-1990, protection of open spaces; and protection of water quality; and found no evidence of inconsistencies. Additionally, the projected related traffic is not anticipated to negatively affect local traffic patterns or significantly diminish the Level of Service of key intersections in the area or exceed VMT thresholds. The tentative parcel map for this subdivision is consistent with the applicable goals and policies as found in the County 2005-2020 General Plan. Therefore, based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the tentative map is consistent with the County General Plan. 2. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. Project Finding: As required by the conditions of approval, the project does not pose any significant traffic impacts and must comply with the “collect and convey” requirements and design standards for construction of public roads. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant is required to contribute fees for parks and recreation, school districts, child care and police services. Payment of these fees along with compliance with the applicable California Building Code will fulfill all obligations related to construction of the project. Therefore, based on the proposal, no physical circumstances would restrict the developer from completing the project. III. Tree Permit Findings Required Finding: The Zoning Administrator is satisfied that necessary factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree permit have been satisfied. Project Finding: An Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, identified 117 code-protected trees in the project work area. The report recommended removal of 97 trees to accommodate the proposed development and called for the protection of 17 trees with work within their dripline. The Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance states that the director of the department may attach conditions to ensure compliance with the chapter and code. These conditions may include a requirement to replace any or all trees on a comparable ratio of either size or quantity. To meet this requirement the applicant would be required to submit and implement a landscaping and irrigation plan that includes replacement of the trees that have been removed. Trees planted will be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits and will be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, or the maximum that can be practicably accommodated on the site. IV. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 4 of 30 In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an initial study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: California Department of Fish Wildlife and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letters were received from individuals. No additional impacts were identified in these comments and all comments are summarized and responded to in the project staff report. Notice of the proposed project was sent to Native American tribes, as applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1. A Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission, dated October 28, 2015, was used to identify tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. No requests for consultation were received. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD20-09531 1. Approval of the Vesting Tentative Map for a 10 Residential-Lot Subdivision; is generally based on the following documents: • Application and materials received on January 13, 2020; • Revised Project Description Dated March 25, 2022; • Revised Vesting Tentative Map for Subdivision CDSD20-09531, received January 28, 2022; • Architectural Plans received December 15, 2021; • Hydrology And Storm Water Detention Report prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; • Storm Water Control Plan prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 5 of 30 • Grayson Road Inclusionary Housing Plan submitted September 18, 2023; • Grayson Road Density Bonus Proposal submitted September 18, 2023; • Geotechnical Report prepared by ENGEO Incorporated dated October 4, 2019; • Archeological Survey and Historical Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Archaeological/Historical Consultants, dated February 2007; • Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020; • Biological Resource Analysis Addendum prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC., dated December 2022; 2. The concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, is approved, as shown in the Vesting Tentative Map received on January 28, 2022. 3. The waivers to development standards is Approved, as shown on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map received January 28, 2022 to allow: a. A reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; b. A reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; c. A reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and d. Reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks to residences (20 feet to garages), 5-foot side yard setback for residences (with 15- foot aggregate setback), and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls 6 feet tall or less. 4. This permit authorizes the development of ten lots on the subject property as generally identified in the CDSD20-09531 vesting tentative map and documents referenced above. 5. A Tree Permit to allow removal of 97 code-protected trees, and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees, as shown in the Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020, is Approved. Indemnification 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 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 provided 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. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 6 of 30 Application Costs 7. The Major Subdivision application was subject to an initial deposit of $7,525.00 that was paid with the application submittal, plus time and material costs if the application review expenses exceed the initial deposit. Any additional fee due must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit, or 60 days of the effective date of this permit, whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance and final file preparation. Pursuant to Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Resolution Number 2013/340, where a fee payment is over 60 days past due, the application shall be charged interest at a rate of ten percent (10%) from the date of approval. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. Compliance Report Prior to Filing the Parcel Map 8. At least 45 days prior to filing of the Parcel Map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide a permit compliance report to the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) for review and approval. The report shall identify all conditions of approval that are administered by the CDD. The report shall document the measures taken by the applicant to satisfy all relevant conditions. Copies of the permit conditions may be obtained from the CDD. Unless otherwise indicated, the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the applicable conditions of this report prior to filing the Final Map. The permit compliance review is subject to staff time and materials charges, with an initial deposit of $2,000 which shall be paid at the time of submittal of the compliance report. Fencing 9. Prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, a fencing plan program shall be submitted to CDD for the review and approval. The approved program shall be attached to the CC&Rs. CC&Rs 10. Prior to recording the Final Map, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall be submitted to CDD for review and approval. This document shall include the maintenance obligation requirements of Public Works condition(s) of approval. Park Dedication Fees 11. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of Community Development Division (CDD) that all Park Dedication fees have been paid for the subdivision. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 7 of 30 Child Care Fees 12. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of CDD that all child care facility fees have been paid for the subdivision. Police Services Fees 13. Election for Establishment of a Police Services District to Augment Police Services: Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, 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 per parcel annual amount (with appropriate future CPI adjustment) established at the time of voting by the Board of Supervisors. The election to provide for the tax shall be completed prior to filing the Final Map. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of holding the election, payable at the time the election is requested by the owner. Allow a minimum of three to four months for processing. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance 14. The applicant shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, the project proponent shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. Aesthetics 15. Thirty days prior to applying for a building permit for new residence, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: • All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the subject property or road. • Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the subject property. (Mitigation Monitoring (MM) Aesthetics 1) Air Quality 16. The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during the project and shall be included on all construction plans: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 8 of 30 • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material to and from the site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations (MM Air Quality 1) Biological Resources 17. If it is determined that additional native trees can be protected in place while still achieving project objectives (as determined by the project Arborist in coordination with the Construction Manager and the project proponent), the project proponent will determine if additional trees can be saved based upon the potential impacts from the grading to the root structure of the trees by “field-fit” grading activities to the greatest extent practicable to conduct such avoidance. 18. In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. (MM Biology 1) 19. All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non- native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 9 of 30 California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 2) Trees shall be planted prior to requesting a final inspection on the residential building permit for each lot. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to removal of trees or prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a security that is acceptable to the CDD. The bond shall include the amount of the approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security: The County ordinance requires that the applicant pay fees to cover all staff time and material costs of staff for processing the landscape improvement security. At the time of submittal of the security, the applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $200. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree(s) intended to be protected has been damaged, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. 20. Prior to recordation of a final map, a Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of CDD. The Final Landscaping Plan shall include the tree restitution required by CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 10 of 30 Mitigation Measure Biology 2, and be consistent shall conform to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County’s Ordinance, if one is adopted. Prior to final building inspection, a completed WELO Part II – Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to CDD staff for review and approval. All landscaping shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, landscaping plans shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. 21. If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. (MM Biology 3) 22. A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. (MM Biology 4) 23. Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 11 of 30 In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red-legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. (MM Biology 5) 24. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. (MM Biology 6) 25. Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 7) 26. For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special- status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: a. To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 12 of 30 b. Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. c. If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artificial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. (MM Biology 8) 27. During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 13 of 30 Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. f. All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wpcontent- /uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf Cultural Resources 28. All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. (MM Cultural Resources 1) 29. In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: a. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 14 of 30 responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. b. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. (MM Cultural Resources 1) Geotechnical Report 30. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. (MM Geology 1) 31. The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. (MM Geology 2) CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 15 of 30 Noise 32. To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: a. The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. b. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. c. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. d. At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. e. The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. (MM Noise 1) Construction Restrictions and Requirements 33. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the project, the project developer or contractor shall mail a notice to each adjacent residential property providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. 34. The applicant shall comply with the following restrictions and requirements, which shall be stated on the face of the construction drawings: A. Unless approved otherwise via prior authorization from the Zoning Administrator for special circumstances, construction activities are limited to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and are prohibited on the calendar dates that the following state and federal holidays are observed: New Year’s Day (State and Federal) Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. (State and Federal) Washington’s Birthday (Federal) Lincoln’s Birthday (State) Presidents’ Day (State and Federal) Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day (State and Federal) Juneteenth National Independence Day (Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 16 of 30 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 details on the actual date the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal holidays: http://www.opm.gov/fedhol California holidays: http://www.edd.ca.gov/payroll_taxes/State_Holidays.htm B. Transport of heavy equipment and trucks is limited to weekdays between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M., and is prohibited on weekends and the aforementioned state and federal holidays. C. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to adjacent properties. This shall be communicated to project-related contractors. D. Construction equipment and materials shall be stored onsite to the maximum extent practicable. E. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site. F. Any debris found outside the site shall immediately be collected and deposited in appropriate receptacles. G. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers that are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences as possible. Contingency Restitution Should Altered Trees Be Damaged 35. Trees to be Preserved but Altered – Pursuant to the conclusions of the arborist report, proposed improvements within the root zone of trees noted on the site plan to be preserved have been determined to be feasible and still allow for preservation provided that the recommendations of the arborist are followed. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 816- 6.1204 of the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, to address the possibility that construction activity nevertheless damages these trees, the applicant shall provide the County with a security (e.g. bond, cash deposit) to be submitted prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 17 of 30 whichever occurs first, to allow for replacement of trees intended to be preserved that are significantly damaged by construction activity. The security shall be based on: A. Extent of Possible Restitution Improvements – The planting of 17, 15-gallon trees, which shall include California native species. in the vicinity of the affected trees, or equivalent planting contribution, and subject to prior review and approval of CDD. B. Determination of Security Amount: The security shall submitted for each lot and provide for all of the following costs: i. Preparation of landscape/irrigation plan by a licensed landscape architect or arborist, which shall comply with the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County Ordinance, if one is adopted; ii. Labor and materials estimate for planting the potential number of trees and related irrigation improvements that may be required, prepared by a licensed landscape contractor; and iii. An additional 20% of the total of the above amounts to address inflation costs. C. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security – The County Ordinance requires that the applicant cover all time and material costs of staff for processing a tree protection security. The Applicant shall pay an initial fee deposit of $200 at time of submittal of a security. D. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree intended to be protected has been damaged by development activity, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution of the damaged trees, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. Debris Recovery 36. At least 15 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit the developer shall submit Construction Waste Management Plan, which identifies approved methods to comply with CalGreen requirement to recycle and/or salvage for reuse construction and demolition waste materials generated at the jobsite. Prior to Final Inspection, developer shall submit Final Report containing information and supporting documentation of the above-mentioned requirement. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 18 of 30 Steet Names 37. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, proposed name(s) shall be submitted for review by the Department of Conservation and Development, GIS/Mapping Section. Alternate street names should be submitted. The Final Map cannot be certified by CDD without the approved street names. Will Serve Letters 38. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from East Bay Municipal Utility District shall be submitted to CDD. 39. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from Central Contra Costa Sanitary District shall be submitted to CDD. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT (HCI) DIVISION, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21- 09581 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 40. This project is subject to County Ordinance Code, Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Terms and definitions regarding the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance are pursuant to this chapter. Pursuant to Section 822-4.402(b) of the County Ordinance Code, a residential development of five or more for-sale units shall require at least fifteen percent of the for-sale units to be developed and sold as affordable units. At least twenty percent of the inclusionary units shall be sold at an affordable price to lower-income households. The remaining units shall be sold to moderate-income families at an affordable price. For-Sale Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee 41. The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 1.35 affordable units (9 total base units x 0.15 of total = 1.35 units) for the project. The Applicant has submitted an Inclusionary Housing Plan dated March 25, 2022, and proposes constructing one for-sale moderate income inclusionary unit (affordable to households making up to 120% Area Median Income) on Lot 1 of the property. The unit on Lot 1 is an approximately 3,097 square-foot single-family detached home consisting of four bedrooms. The one moderate-income unit proposed for compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements is the same moderate-income unit required for compliance with the Density Bonus request. This unit may be referenced as inclusionary unit, density bonus unit, or both in these conditions. The requirements for the one moderate-income unit must comply with both the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and State Density Bonus law, and the most restrictive requirements would apply. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 19 of 30 The Applicant has proposed to pay a partial in-lieu fee for the fractional 0.35 inclusionary unit, and the County has accepted this proposal. The current calculation of the partial in-lieu fee for the fractional inclusionary unit is $15,444.00. The final calculation of the in-lieu fee will be calculated upon payment. This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferable. A partial in- lieu fee of $15,444.00 will be paid for the fractional .35 unit (.35 = 26% of the fee total of $59,401. 26% of this fee = $15,444.00) Density Bonus Request 42. The Applicant submitted a revised project description which included a density bonus request dated March 25, 2022, which proposed constructing ten percent of the total dwelling units of a housing development where all the units are offered to the public for purchase. The Applicant proposed constructing one moderate-income unit, constituting twelve percent of the total for-sale units in the development. Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant may request one project concession or incentive for providing twelve percent (one unit) for moderate-income units of the total units within the for-sale housing development. The applicant requested the concession to not have to complete frontage improvements. The County accepted the Applicant’s request to not complete frontage improvements. To fully improve the property frontage would result in significant costs that could preclude the construction of the development at its proposed density including the moderate unit. Density Bonus – Reduction in Development Standards Pursuant to Government Code 65915(e), the Applicant proposed a waiver or reduction of the following development standards: • Lot Area – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 15,000 square feet, proposed lot sizes ranges from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. • Lot Width – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 100 feet, the proposed average lot widths range from 56.43 to 99.01 feet. • Lot Depth – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum of 120 feet in depth, the proposed lot depths range from 87.45 to 331 feet. The lot depths for all proposed lots, except Lot 1 comply with the minimum requirements as proposed. • Residence and Retaining Wall Structure Setbacks – where the County Ordinance Code requires all structures meet setback requirements, the proposed residence shall meet a 14 foot front setback except for the garage which shall meet a 20-foot front setback, the residence shall meet a 5-foot side yard setback with a 15-foot aggregate side yard setback, and the proposed retaining wall setbacks for walls 6 feet tall or shorter is 0 feet on all lots. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 20 of 30 Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement 43. At least 90 days before the recordation of the Parcel Map or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first, the Applicant shall execute an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant to Chapter 822-4 Inclusionary Housing, Chapter 822-2 Density Bonus, and Government Code 95915 to ensure that the property will be deed restricted for one unit to be affordable and sold to a moderate income household. This 90-day period allows for the preparation, County approval, and recordation of the Agreement prior to the milestones referenced above. To initiate the County to prepare and execute an Agreement, the Applicant must file a condition of approval compliance review application accompanied by the appropriate fees, documents, and exhibits listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist and/or Density Bonus Plan Checklist. The Agreement must be submitted to the Board of Supervisors before execution by all parties and recordation. The Agreement will establish the process for determining the unit’s maximum affordable sales price, buyer eligibility, and additional program details as referenced in Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and Government Code 65915. A detailed timeline for the project, including the project’s construction, marketing, the Applicant accepting and reviewing applications from qualified households, and the sale of the inclusionary unit. General 44. The following are general terms for granting a density bonus and compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. a. The Applicant hereby represents warrants and covenants that will cause the Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County, California, and other places the County may reasonably request. The Applicant shall pay fees incurred with any such recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the document by the County and before the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first. b. The one inclusionary unit in the project shall be available for sale to members of the general public who are income eligible. The Applicant shall not give preference to any particular class or group of persons in selling the units, except that the units must be sold to a household with income no higher than 120% of the Area Median Income for Contra Costa County as adjusted for family size as defined in Section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code. There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 21 of 30 person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), age (except for lawful senior housing), ancestry, or disability, in the sale of the unit in the project nor shall the Applicant or any person claiming under or through the Applicant, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation concerning the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of homeowners of any unit in connection with employment of persons for construction of the project. c. The County will provide the Applicant with income certification forms to be completed by the potential homebuyers. The income levels of all moderate-income household applicants for the inclusionary/density bonus unit shall be pre-certified by the Applicant (or subsequent holder of the Agreement(s)) prior to submittal to the County for review and approval. d. Upon violating any of the Agreement’s provisions by the Applicant, the County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the breach. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a reasonable period, not longer than thirty (30) days after the date the notice is deemed received, or within such further time as the County determines is necessary to correct the violation, the County may declare a default under the Agreement. Upon declaration of a default or if the County determines that the Applicant has made any misrepresentation in connection with receiving any benefits under this Agreement, the County may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for such relief at law or in equity as may be appropriate. Terms of Affordability 45. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted so that if the home is sold within forty-five (45) years, it must be sold at an affordable sales price to a moderate-income household. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted upon sale to ensure the continued affordability of this unit for the required term of affordability in accordance with Government Code 65915. a. Affordable Sales Price – means a sales price at which a moderate-income household can qualify for the purchase of target units, taking into account available financing, number of bedrooms and therefore, assumed household size, reasonable down payment, and affordable housing costs as defined in Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5. The affordable sales price for moderate income households must not exceed a price affordable to a persons and families whose income is at or below one hundred ten percent AMI. Development Standards 46. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and finished in compliance with the approved Inclusionary Housing Plan. The unit is subject to the standards of Section 822.4.412 of the County Ordinance. a. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and occupied before or concurrently with the market rate units within the same residential development. A hold will be placed on the CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 22 of 30 final inspection/occupancy for all building permits issued within the subdivision to ensure that the inclusionary/density bonus unit meets this requirement. b. The average number of bedrooms for the inclusionary unit must be equivalent to the average number of bedrooms for market-rate units within the same residential development. Marketing and Homebuyer Selection 47. It is anticipated that the Applicant will construct all project units and market them before construction completion. The Applicant shall submit documentation and other information to the County for review and approval at least 90 days prior to construction completion and prior to the Applicant’s request for a final building inspection and final occupancy of the building. The documentation and information required for review and approval are listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist or Density Bonus Plan Checklist and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Marketing Plan b. Homebuyer Selection Plan. The homebuyer selection plan should include a provision for a lottery process for the inclusionary/density bonus unit. c. Marketing Materials, including translated Marketing Materials in Spanish and Chinese. In addition to other marketing efforts proposed by the Applicant in the marketing plan, the inclusionary unit shall be marketed through local, non-profit, social service, faith- based, and other organizations with potential buyers as clients or constituents. Marketing materials shall be made available online for at least one month before the first sale and shared with County Housing staff to promote to its mailing lists. The Applicant shall translate marketing materials, and the marketing plan shall be submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development before marketing the inclusionary housing unit. Marketing may also include publicity through local television and radio stations as well as local newspapers, including the Contra Costa Times, Classified Flea Market, El Mensajero, La Opinion, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily. 48. The developer shall refer all qualified homebuyers to a HUD Homebuyer Counselor prior to the sale of the inclusionary unit. For-Sale Inclusionary/Density Bonus Unit Restrictions 49. The initial sale of a for-sale inclusionary unit shall occur only to a household that meets the following criteria: a. The household has not owned a residence within the previous three years; and CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 23 of 30 b. The household has no more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars in assets. The amount excludes assets reserved for a down payment and closing costs, assets in retirement savings accounts, and medical savings accounts. c. The purchaser of the for-sale inclusionary/density bonus unit must agree to occupy the dwelling unit as their principal residence. d. The term of affordability for the inclusionary/density bonus unit is 45 years. The for-sale inclusionary unit may be resold after the initial sale to a moderate-income purchaser at a moderate-income sales price. If a moderate-income purchaser cannot be found after diligently marketing the unit widely and after a period determined by DCD, the unit may be sold to an above-moderate- income purchaser at a market price, provided that the sale results in a recapture by the County of financial interest in the unit equal to the sum of: The difference between the initial affordable sales price and the appraised market value of the unit at the time of the initial sale; and The County’s proportionate share of any appreciation since the time of the initial sale. Appreciation is the difference between the resale price to the above-moderate-income purchaser and the appraised market value at the initial sale. The County’s proportionate share of appreciation is equal to the percentage by which the initial affordable sales price was less than the appraised market value at the time of the initial sale. Prequalification of Homebuyers and Compliance Review 50. The Applicant is responsible for marketing and prequalifying potential homebuyers for income qualification. The Applicant shall submit for DCD’s review and prequalification prior to the initial sale of the inclusionary/density bonus unit, and the Applicant shall submit to the Department of Conservation and Development for review and approval, all forms, and documentation demonstrating that the buyer of the unit is qualified as a moderate-income household. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection/ occupancy of all building permits associated with the construction of the residences in the project until documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of Conservation and Development. To initiate this prequalification review, the applicant must file a COA Compliance Review Application if there is no open compliance review application for this project. 51. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and Development informed of the contact information of the owner or designee responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be contacted (i.e., mailing addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers) at all times. a. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 24 of 30 development, whichever comes first, and with filing a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the name of the contact representing the property owner for permit compliance and their contact information. b. Should the contact subsequently change (e.g., new designee or owner), within 30 days of the change, the Applicant shall issue a letter to the Department of Conservation and Development with the name of the new party who has been assigned permit compliance responsibility and their contact information. Failure to satisfy this condition may result in the commencement of procedures to revoke the permit. PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION CDSD20-09531 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9, and Title 10 of the Ordinance Code. Any exception(s) must be stipulated in these Conditions of Approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the tentative map submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development on January 28, 2022. COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO FILING OF THE PARCEL MAP. General Requirements 52. 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 vesting tentative map received by the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division, on January 28, 2022. 53. Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted, if necessary, to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, along with review and inspection fees, and secu¬rity for all improvements required by the Ordinance Code for the conditions of approval of this subdivision. Any necessary traffic signing and stripping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division of the Public Works Department and the City of Pleasant Hill as applicable. Roadway Improvements (Grayson Road) 54. The Applicant shall construct frontage improvements along Grayson Road in accordance with the recommendations of the City of Pleasant Hill. The applicant will need to demonstrate that the City of Pleasant Hill approves of the frontage improvements proposed under this project. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 25 of 30 Access to Adjoining Property 55. The Applicant shall furnish proof to the Public Works Department 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. 56. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Pleasant Hill for construction within the limits of the City of Pleasant Hill. 57. The Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved site/development plan. Abutters Rights 58. Applicant shall relinquish abutter’s rights of access along Grayson Road with the exception of the proposed private road intersection. Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance: 59. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the private road intersection with Grayson Road for a design speed of 45 miles per hour. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide sight distance at these driveways. Any new landscaping, signs, fencing, retaining walls, or other obstructions proposed at the driveways shall be setback to ensure that the sight lines are clear. Private Road 60. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system to current County private road standards with a minimum pavement width of 28 feet, with 4.5-foot sidewalk (measured from the face of curb) within a minimum 42-foot access easement. 61. The Applicant shall construct the on-site roadways and the internal road network (serving the residential development) to current County private road standards. Although the proposed on-site roadways are shown as private, the pavement structural section shall conform to County public road standards. 62. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, applicant shall construct a paved turnaround at the end of the proposed private road subject to the review of the Fire District. Street Lights: 63. Property owner(s) shall annex to the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2010-1 formed for Countywide Street Light Financing. Annexation into a street light service area does not include the transfer of ownership and maintenance of street lighting on private roads. Bicycle - Pedestrian Facilities: 64. The Applicant shall design all public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance with Title 24 (for Accessibility) and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This shall include all sidewalks, paths, driveway depressions, and curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 26 of 30 curb returns to accommodate the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4-foot landing on top of any curb ramp proposed. Parking 65. Parking shall be prohibited on one side of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 36 feet and on both sides of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 28 feet. “No Parking” signs shall be installed along these portions of the roads subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department. Utilities/Undergrounding 66. The Applicant shall underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities, including those along the frontage of Grayson Road. Applicant shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground electrical, gas, telephone, cable television and communication conduits and cables including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. The composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans shall be signed by a licensed civil engineer. Drainage Improvements: 67. 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 system which conveys the stormwater to a natural watercourse, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. Applicant shall verify the adequacy at any downstream drainage facility accepting stormwater from this project prior to discharging runoff. If the downstream system(s) is inadequate to handle the existing and project condition for the required design storm event, applicant shall construct improvements to make the system adequate. Applicant shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. 68. The nearest public drainage facility is an existing storm drain located on Grayson Road. Applicant shall verify its adequacy prior to discharging run off. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 69. Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards. 70. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner. Floodplain Management: 71. A portion of the project property lies within a Special Flood Hazard Area (100 year flood boundary) as designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 27 of 30 Rate Maps. The applicant shall be aware of and comply with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (Federal) and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance as they pertain to development and future construction of any structures on this property. Creek Banks and Creek Structure Setbacks: 72. The Property owner shall relinquish "development rights" over that portion of the site that is within the structure setback area of Grayson Creek. The structure setback area shall be determined by using the criteria outlined in Chapter 914 14, "Rights of Way and Setbacks," of the Subdivision Ordinance. "Development rights" shall be conveyed to the County by grant deed. 73. The property owner shall be aware that the creek banks on the site are potentially unstable. The property owner shall execute a recordable agreement with the County which states that the developer and the property owner and the future property owner(s) will hold harmless Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District in the event of damage to the on-site and off-site improvements as a result of creek- bank failure or erosion. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): 74. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (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. Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMPs) for the reduction or elimination of stormwater pollutants. The project design shall incorporate, wherever feasible, the following long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program for the site's stormwater drainage. - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Install approved full trash capture devices on all catch basins (excluding catch basins within bioretention basins) as reviewed and approved by Public Works Department. Trash capture devices shall meet the requirements of the County’s NPDES Permit. - Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain markers. - Construct concrete driveway weakened plane joints at angles to assist in directing run-off to landscaped/pervious areas prior to entering the street curb and gutter. - Distribute public information items regarding the Clean Water Program and lot specific IMPs to buyers. - Other alternatives comparable to the above as approved by Public Works. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 28 of 30 Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance 75. The applicant shall submit a final Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) and a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance Plan (O+M Plan) to the Public Works Department, which shall be reviewed for compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and shall be deemed consistent with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) prior to filing of the Final Map. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant. 76. Improvement plans shall be reviewed to verify consistency with the final SWCP and compliance with Provision C.3 of the County’s NPDES Permit and the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014). 77. Stormwater management facilities shall be subject to inspection by the Public Works Department; all time and materials costs for inspection of stormwater management facilities shall be borne by the applicant. 78. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall enter into a Stormwater Management Facility Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County, in which the property owner(s) shall accept responsibility for and related to the operation and maintenance of the stormwater facilities, and grant access to relevant public agencies for inspection of stormwater management facilities. 79. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall annex the subject property into Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities), which funds responsibilities of Contra Costa County under its NPDES Permit to oversee the ongoing operation and maintenance of stormwater facilities by property owners. 80. Any proposed water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer than 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. Drainage Area Fee Ordinance: 81. The Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 62 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors prior to initiation of the use requested with this application. This fee shall be paid prior to filing of the Final Map. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 29 of 30 ADVISORY NOTES ADVISORY NOTES ARE NOT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; THEY ARE PROVIDED TO ALERT THE APPLICANT TO ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES, STATUTES, AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT. A. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, ASSESSMENTS, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations or exactions required as part of this project approval. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant to Government Code Section 66020 and must be delivered to the Community Development Division within a 90- day period that begins on the date that this project is approved. If the 90th day falls on a day that the Community Development Division is closed, then the protest must be submitted by the end of the next business day. B. Applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Central Contra Costa Areas of Benefit, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Payment is required prior to issuance of a building permit. C. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and Wildlife of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Wildlife Code. D. 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. E. Further development of the parcel may need to comply with the latest Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. This compliance may require a Stormwater Control Plan and an Operations and Maintenance Plan prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. Compliance may also require annexation of the subject property into the Community Facilities District 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities) and entering into a standard Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County. F. This project is subject to the development fees in effect under County Ordinance as December 17, 2020, the date the vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Department of Conservation and Development. These fees are in addition to any other development fees, which may specified in the conditions of approval. G. Additional requirements may be imposed by the following agencies and departments: CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 30 of 30 • Public Works Department • Building Inspection Division • Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District • Health Services Department • Central Contra Costa Sanitary District • East Bay Municipal Utility District The Applicant is strongly encouraged to review these agencies’ requirements prior to continuing with the project. Department of Conservation and Development County Zoning Administrator Monday, October 2, 2023 – 1:30 P.M. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item #_____ Project Title: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File Number: #CDSD20-09531 Applicant: Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde Owner: Grayson Road LLC Zoning/General Plan: R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District / Single-Family Residential Low Density (SL) Site Address/Location: 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 (APNs: 166- 030-001 and 166-030-002) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared which indicates that there will be no significant environmental impact as a result of the project. Project Planner: Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP, (925) 655-2872 Staff Recommendation: Approve (See Section II for Full Recommendation) I. PROJECT SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. The residence on Lot 1 would be restricted for sale to a moderate -income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions pursuant to the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. The project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow average lot widths as low as 56 ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 2 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirements. The project is also seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt -concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees. II. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Zoning Administrator: A. FIND that on the basis of the whole record before the County (Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553), that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project reflects the County’s independent judgment and analysis; B. ADOPT the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) prepared for the project; C. APPROVE the Vesting Tentative Map received January 28, 2022, by the Department of Conservation and Development, Current Planning Division; D. APPROVE the attached findings and conditions of approval prepared for this project; and E. DIRECT Staff to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. III. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The subject property is located within the Single-Family Residential Low Density (SL) General Plan land use designation. B. Zoning: The subject property is located within the R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District. C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance: On March 24, 2023, an Initial Study was prepared for the project, and posted and circulated for public review. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was found that the project would not result in any significant environmental impacts. Comments regarding the adequacy of the review were received within the comment period and are discussion of the issues raised is provided in Section VIII below. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 3 IV. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION The 3.05-gross-acre project site is located on the south side of Grayson Road, opposite the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The roughly L-shaped project site is comprised of two parcels: a northern parcel that fronts on Grayson Road, and a southern parcel that is bound by Grayson Creek to the south and east. Grayson Creek runs roughly east-west along the southern boundary of the project site, then takes a northward bend forming the east boundary. Other private properties with single-family residences abut the property to the north and west. The immediate surrounding area is representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County. Properties along Grayson Road are predominantly developed with single-family residences. Within a half-mile radius, developed parcels range in size from 4,000 square feet to 68,700 square feet, with a median size of approximately 13,000 square feet. The larger vicinity includes a mix of neighborhood- residential uses including single-family residences, churches, schools, and parks. Regional access to the site is provided via I-680 by way of Gregory Lane and Taylor Boulevard and is also provided via State Route (SR) 24 by way of Pleasant Hill Road/Taylor Boulevard. Local access to the project site would be provided via Grayson Road and a new private internal street. V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021 -square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. Running southwest to northwest along the southern boundary of the project site is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek. The proposed project does not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 4 for the removal of 97 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code- protected trees. The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit. In addition to the increased density of one unit (10 units total), the project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1- 10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. VI. AGENCY COMMENTS A. Building Inspection Division: In a memo received January 22, 2020, Building Inspection Division staff stated that they had no comments related to their review of the project. B. Housing Division: In a memo received September 13, 2023, Housing Division staff provided conditions of approval based on the applicants proposed inclusionary housing plan, for compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. The conditions of approval have been incorporated in the project approval. C. Transportation Planning Section: In a memo received March 26, 2021, the Transportation Planning Section stated that the subject project should incorporate Complete Streets infrastructure into the proposed roadway. Completes streets infrastructure is incorporated, as further discussed in section VII. D. Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division (Public Works): In a memo dated September 27, 2023, Public Works provided recommended conditions of approval for the project. Those conditions have been incorporated into the project as COAs. E. Public Works Department, Flood Control District: In a memo dated February 18, 2020, the Flood Control District provided recommended conditions of approval for the project. Those conditions have been incorporated into the project as COAs. The district also provided general comments stating that the project is subject to drainage impact ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 5 fees and that the drainage and hydrology must be adequate. The project is expected to meet these requirements. F. Contra Costa Environmental Health Division (CCEHD): CCEHD has been notified of the project through an agency comment request sent on January 16, 2020, and multiple circulations of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. CCEHD has not responded to these solicitations. However, standard requirements including permits for any well or soil boring, or for any abandoned wells and septic tanks, which must be destroyed; and recommended that project be served by public sewer and water, are expected to be satisfied by the project. G. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD): In a letter dated January 30, 2020, CCCFPD staff provided comments related to the design of the proposed project. Prior to construction, the proposed project would be reviewed by the CCCFPD for compliance with Title 7, Division 722 of the Ordinance Code, also known as the County’s Fire Code. The proposed project would also submit applicable fire prevention fees required by CCCFPD Ordinance 2021-18. All requirements are expected to be complied with. H. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD): In a letter dated February 6, 2020, MVSD staff stated that sanitary sewer service is available for the project and that the proposed project would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity. I. East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD): EBMUD has reviewed the project application documents regarding the provision of new water service pursuant to EBMUD water service regulations and stated that adequate water service is available. J. California Historical Resources Information System Northwest Information Center(CHRIS NIC): CHRIS NIC provided a letter dated February 7, 2020, which stated that based on the results of a historical resources evaluation for the proposed project area, the project area has a low possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological sites. Nevertheless, conditions of approval would be included to ensure the preservation of potentially unknown subsurface resources that could be encountered during ground disturbance. K. Contra Costa Mosquito Vector Control District (CCMVCD): In a letter dated January 21, 2020, CCMVCD staff stated that the proposed project should not create any areas where water would stagnate for longer than 72 hours and that operations and maintenance plans for flow-through planters should be included with the project. These requirements are expected to be complied with. VII. STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed ten parcels would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in design and density. The infill project layout and access would provide for reasonable ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 6 development with no significant or adverse effects to the surrounding community or environment. Analysis of individual aspects of the project are provided below: A. State Density Bonus Law Analysis: The State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code §§ 65915-65918) incentivizes the building of affordable housing by granting developers “a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density,” as well as other incentives or concessions, waivers of development standards, and parking ratio reductions in return for a commitment to provide affordable housing as part of a development project. If the developer meets the requirements of section 65915, a city or county must award a density bonus. (Gov. Code, § 65915(b)) The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household (12% of 9 base lots), therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915, subdivision (b)(1)(D). By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit (9 du x.07 = 9.63, which rounds up to 10). (Gov. Code, § 65915(f)(4), (5).) The following summarizes the density calculation. Base Density Project Site Gross Acreage: 3.05 Acres Project Site Net Acreage (Excludes Private ROW: 12,866 sq. ft.): 2.76 Net Acres Base Density Calculation: 2.76 Acres x 1.0 to 2.99̅̅̅̅ = 2.76 to 8.28 units. Rounds to 3 to 9 units1. Density Bonus Proposed Percentage Moderate-Income Units: 1 of 9 units = 11.11%. Round up to 12%. Density Bonus Allowed Per Gov. Code Section 65915(f)(4): 7% Max Density Bonus Calc: 9 units + 7% Bonus = 9.63 units. Rounds up to 10 Units. Total Allowable Units: 10 Units In addition to the increased density, the Density Bonus Law provides for regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to 1 Government Code section 65915, subdivisions (f)(5) states, “All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number.” Additionally, subdivision (q) states that “Each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number.” ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 7 provide for affordable housing costs. (Gov. Code § 65915(d)(1)). The Density Bonus Law puts the burden of rejecting any proposed incentives or concessions on the County and requires the County to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the County makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions; (B) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households; (C) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. Furthermore, the Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915(e)(1)) states “In no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section.” The applicant has requested waivers of development standards for lot size and setbacks. The applicant has stated that application of these development standards would physically preclude the construction of the project, at its proposed density, as well as the proposed moderate-income unit. B. General Plan Consistency: The proposed project would conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. As described above, the project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. The density of the proposed project would be 3.62 dwelling units per net acre, which would be deemed consistent with the SL Land Use designation density range of 1 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre as a result of the utilization of a Density Bonus. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. The County’s land use compatibility standards contained in Figure 11-6 of the Noise ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 8 Element, ambient noise environments are considered normally acceptable for new single-family residential land use development with noise levels ranging up to 60 A- weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)/day/night average sound level (Ldn). Environments with noise levels from 55 dBA to70 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered conditionally acceptable for new single-family land use development; and such development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Environments with noise levels from 70 dBA to 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered normally unacceptable for new single-family land use development, and clearly unacceptable for levels above 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Two noise measurement surveys were taken to determine existing noise levels at the project site. The dominant noise source in the project vicinity was found to be traffic noise on adjacent roadways and lawnmowing. The noise survey documented that existing ambient noise levels on the project site range from 61 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq), as measured at approximately 20 feet from the edge of Grayson Road, to 47 dBA Leq at the project boundary adjoining 2043 Mohawk Drive property. The noise measurement survey files are included in the FCS Draft IS/MND report. These noise measurements were taken during the peak noise hours of the day, and represent the expected highest hourly average noise levels that are experienced on the project site. Resulting 24-hour average noise levels would be even lower when averaged with quieter hours of the day. Therefore, the existing ambient noise environment of the project site is within the conditionally acceptable range for new residential land use development. For conditionally acceptable noise environments, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems, will normally suffice. Based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels, with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for multi-family residential developments would provide 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA or more with windows open. The proposed project will include alternative ventilation systems such as mechanical air conditioning whick will allow windows to remain closed for prolonged periods of time, sufficiently reducing traffic noise levels to meet the interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 61 dBA - 25 dBA = 36 dBA). C. Zoning Consistency: The project would be considered consistent with the R-15 Single- family zoning district as a result of the utilization of the Density Bonus, pursuant to Government Code sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) and County Ordinance Code Section 822-2. The State Density Bonus Law provides for unlimited number of waivers of development standards in order to construct the project at the proposed density. (See Gov. Code, § 65915(b)(1), (e)(1).) Where a development standard would physically ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 9 prevent the project from being built at the permitted density and with the granted concessions/incentives, the developer may propose to have those standards waived or reduced. The applicant is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 (instead of 100 feet); (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; (d) a reduction in minimum front yard and side yard setback and (e) a waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls. The proposed lot sizes, lot width, depth, and setbacks, are shown in the following table. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers as application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit and with the application of the available incentives, concessions, and density bonus. 1024 & 1026 Grayson Rd. Proposed Development Standards (R-15 Standards) Lot # Area ( 15,000 Sq. Ft.) Depth (100 Ft. Min.) Average Width (100 Ft. Min.) Front Yard Setback (20 feet) Side Yard Setback (25 feet aggregate, no yard less than 10 feet) Retaining Walls 6’ or less Lot 1 7,347 87.45 84.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 2 22,460 331 67.85 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 3 15,236 270 56.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 4 14,257 144 99.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 5 14,713 195 75.45 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 10 Lastly, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. D. Traffic and Circulation: Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan requires a traffic impact analysis of any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak period trip generation rates of 1.0 trip per dwelling unit for single-family residences, the proposed project consisting of the ten- lot subdivision, and the future construction of 10 single-family residence (8 net new units) would generate an additional eight AM and eight PM new peak period trips, and therefore, is not required to have a project-specific traffic impact analysis. Since the project would yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, the proposed project would not conflict with the circulation system in the Pleasant Hill area. The proposed subdivision project includes a new 28-foot-wide access road which would permit two 10-foot travel lanes and an 8-foot wide parking on one side of the street. Additionally, a 5-foot wide, monolithic, elevated sidewalk would be constructed adjacent to the new road to provide access for pedestrians and persons with disabilities within the project. Along the project frontage, the project will provide a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping in-lieu of complete frontage improvements. Lot 6 11,261 163 69.09 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 7 11,360 166 68.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 8 13,388 185 72.37 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 9 13,655 173 78.93 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 10 14,013 220 63.70 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 11 The Density Bonus application submitted to the County has requested that the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. Improved frontage improvements are defined as curb, gutter pan, and a sidewalk. No complete frontage improvements exist along the southern portion of Grayson Road, from the intersection of Reliez Valley Road to the west and Heritage Hills Drive to the East (that road segment is in is in excess of 2,000 feet in length). Complete frontage improvements would be prohibitively expensive given the length of the project frontage (354 feet), the required grading, tree removal, and utility requirements. In addition, there is no sidewalk along the southern side of Grayson Road to connect with, in 1,000 feet in either direction. The adjacent properties that front along Grayson Road are not expected to develop in the future. Finally, existing Grayson Road has adequate width to support two travel lanes, parking, and a bike lane. Therefore the overall the surrounding circulation system is consistent with the Complete Streets policy. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right of way for each category of users be incorporated into all planning, funding, design, approval, and implementation processes for any construction, reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, operations, alteration, or repair of streets (including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system), except that specific infrastructure for a given category of users may be excluded if an exemption is approved via the process set forth in section C.1 of the policy. The policy applies to both publicly owned roads/land and private developments (or redevelopment areas). Additionally, the County General Plan includes many policies promoting pedestrian and bicycle facilities. As designed, the project would be consistent with this policy. E. Drainage: The proposed project would comply with applicable water quality and discharge requirements. The proposed project would add an estimated 50,825 square feet of new impervious surface area. The C.3 requirements stipulate that projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface must incorporate specific measures to reduce runoff, such as dispersion of runoff to vegetated areas, use of pervious pavement, installation of cisterns, and installation of bioretention facilities or planter boxes. Implementation of these measures would be required as a condition of approval. An existing 24” reenforced concrete pipe within Grayson Road currently collects stormwater runoff from upstream properties. The 24” storm drainpipe connects to 2 ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 12 6x6 concrete boxes under Grayson Creek and discharges water directly to Grayson Creek. Most runoff on the project site would be directed to a 674-cubic-foot bioretention basin located adjacent to Lot 2 for treatment. Once treated, runoff would be directed to the public storm drainpipe beneath Grayson Road. A portion of the runoff would bypass this treatment system and instead enter the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24 -inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff, even in a 100 -year storm event. This would ensure that project runoff would not exceed existing conditions. F. Housing Element Compliance – Residential Sites Inventory: California Government Code Section 65863 mandates that no local government action shall reduce, require or permit the reduction of the residential density, or allow development at a lower residential density for any parcel identified in the sites inventory for the adopted Housing Element, unless the local government makes written findings that the reduction is consistent with the General Plan, and the remaining sites identified in the Housing Element’s site inventory are adequate to meet the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need. As defined by statute, “a lower residential density” refers to allowing fewer units on the site than were projected within the site inventory of the Housing Element. In order to assess whether this residential development application is subject to requirements of California Government Code section 65863, staff reviewed the site inventory for the adopted 2014 Housing Element and determined that Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 are not among the parcels listed in the inventory of residential sites which were relied upon to meet the County’s share of regional housing needs. VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 13 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: the CDFW and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letter were received from individuals. All comments are summarized and responded to below. A. Agency Comments a. California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDFW Comment 1 The comment provides introductory remarks and requests that the previous comment letter be addressed and met as part of the Conditions of Approval for the proposed project by the County. All comments have been addressed and mitigation measures would be included in the project conditions of approval. CDFW Comment 2 CDFW recommends that the project area be surveyed for special-status plants by a qualified Botanist following the “Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities,” (Protocol) which can be found online at Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survfey- Protocols#377281280-plants. Additionally, If State-listed plants, special-status plants, State rare plants found on the CNPS California Rare Plant Ranking system, or plants found on the CNPS East Bay Chapter’s Database of Rare and Unusual Plants are identified during botanical surveys, consultation with the CDFW is warranted to determine whether the proposed project can avoid take. Mitigation Measure Biology 1, would require that in the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys would be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. CDFW Comment 3 ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 14 CDFW summarizes the Revised Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020, and authored by Traverso Tree Service, and states that an analysis of oak natural communities was not provided, and the Revised Arborist Report and IS/MND did not include an assessment of canopy cover and absolute percentages in upland areas or covering the channel of Grayson Creek. CDFW also states that the IS/MND fails to note that this collection of oaks may be identified as Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, based on these initial findings; both of which are Sensitive Natural Communities ranked as State Rank 3 and 4 respectively according to the CDFW’s Natural Communities. Additionally, CDFW identifies that the Mitigation Measure related to replanting did not include a monitoring component, which is inadequate for mitigating the project-related impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities to a level of less than significant. Furthermore, CDFW provides recommendations on how the planting could be implemented to mitigate impacts. The comment does not provide any ecological or other basis for concluding the tree replanting Mitigation Measure is inadequate, or to support the request for additional mitigation for the removal of trees. The BRA Addendum, prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC, dated December 2022, and recirculated IS/MND provide an analysis of project impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities, drawing the conclusion that the proposed project would result in removal of 1.1 acre of Valley Oak Woodland. The revised Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodland in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of- kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with a replacement tree planting plan that shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Though this is not consistent with the CDFW recommendation, the mitigation ratio contained is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice and is supported by the BRA. This implementation includes bonding to ensure that the plantings are viable or replaced. As detailed in the BRA Addendum, the proposed project’s potential impacts to trees and Valley Oak Woodland have been adequately analyzed, adequate mitigation has been identified, and the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to trees. CDFW Comment 4 CDFW states that the initially circulated IS/MND Mitigation Measure Biology 1 requires that nesting bird surveys would be limited to the large trees of the adjacent riparian area from February 15 to August 31, and that this measure fails to avoid ground nesting birds and those that nest in shrubs. CDFW recommended that a revised mitigation measure be incorporated into the revised IS/MND. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 15 Mitigation Measure Biology 3 has been updated based on the BRA Addendum and includes additional survey requirements to protect birds that nest on the ground, in shrubs, and on structures that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. With implementation of this updated mitigation, CDFW’s concerns related to birds would be addressed. CDFW Comment 5 CDFW recommends alternative language to replace Mitigation Measure Biology-4 to mitigate for the permanent impacts to special-status bats and their habitats to a level of less than significant. Mitigation Measure Biology-8 includes the recommended language. CDFW Comment 6 CDFW requires a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq., for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank including associated riparian or wetland resources; or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Based on the Vesting Tentative Map for the proposed project, dated January 28, 2022, and authored by DeBolt Civil Engineering, an LSA Notification under Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. would be a requirement of the proposed project as designed. As stated within the BRA Addendum, as project implementation would result in impacts to CDFW’s Fish and Game Code Sections 1600–1607 jurisdiction, a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) would be required. The project proponent will apply for an LSAA prior to project implementation. CDFW Comment 7 CDFW requests that any special-status species and natural communities detected during project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Any special-status species found to exist at the site during biological surveys or project implementation would be reported to the CNDDB. b. East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) The letter from EBMUD stated the permitting requirements that would apply to the project from the agency. The adequacy of the IS/MND was not questioned. The applicant would adhere to all EBMUD requirements. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 16 B. Public Comments a. Suzanne Francois Francois Comment 1 The comment is concerned about the lack of detail provided about the proposed project. The comment requests more information, such as building specifics, ADU details, riparian setback details, lighting, and more. The comment adds that the project site’s wildlife impact reports are incomplete. The proposed project would not construct ADUs. Details regarding the proposed building and development standards are included in the Land Use and Planning section of the IS/MND. A 50-foot setback from the Creek for protection of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor would be provided, as described in IS/MND Project Description, and as shown in the Vesting Tentative Map for the project. Lighting impacts were analyzed in IS/MND Aesthetics section, which found that new sources of light and glare would originate from internal and external housing lights and car headlights. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1, would require a Lighting Plan that would ensure all lighting is reasonable oriented onto the subject property. Francois Comment 2 The comment states that the description of the neighborhood around the project site is inaccurate. The comment adds that the description of the on-site woodland area is also inaccurate. The comment does not provide specifics as to the inaccuracies of the provided descriptions. All relevant information regarding the surrounding neighborhood and on-site woodland has been included in the IS/MND. Francois Comment 3 The commenter questions how nesting owls residing at the project site will be protected. Mitigation Measure Biology 3 includes pre-construction survey requirements to avoid impacts to nesting birds that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in Project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 17 Francois Comment 4 The comment states that the proposed project is not transparent. The comment questions why Grayson Creek and its habitats are not being protected. The comment on the proposed project’s transparency is not an environmental issue and the project has been discussed in detail and publicly noticed multiple times. Project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor. However, a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring on-site [79 percent of the on-site riparian habitat] would be avoided). Grayson Creek itself would not be impacted by the proposed project. b. Clay Haberman Haberman Comment 1 The comment states that 12-hour noise-inducing activities during the week for the proposed project is excessive. Furthermore, the comment requests that noise- inducing activities for the proposed project be limited on Saturdays to 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The project would include standard conditions of approval that would limit the construction to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Haberman Comment 2 The commenter states that the Arborist Report and tree survey have not been updated since the property owner removed trees and thus, it must be confirmed with a new tree survey that no protected trees were removed. All trees documented in the arborist report have remained as protected trees throughout the review of the project. During project implementation, the removed trees, accidental or planned, would be verified through compliance review of the conditions of approval and would be required to be mitigated as detailed in the conditions. Haberman Comment 3 The comment states that a tree protection plan should be mandated as a condition of approval and that the replacement planting requirements should be quantified based on the original survey prior to the removal of trees. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 18 As required by the conditions of approval, a tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits. Haberman Comment 4 The comment notes that standard parking stalls are 9 feet wide and 19 feet long in the County for residential projects. As such, the comment states that the proposed setback of 14 feet would not be able to accommodate cars on the driveway and should not include the garage. The comment notes that standard parking stalls are 19 feet long, and that cars would not be able to park on the proposed driveways as they would be too short and narrow. The comment further notes that the proposed road would be too narrow to accommodate parallel parking, and therefore residents of the proposed project would have to park on Grayson Road. The comment further states that as such, adequate frontage improvements should be provided to Grayson Road to ensure parking space and pedestrian safety. The proposed project would enforce a 20-foot minimum front yard setback requirement to the face of the two-car garages in each proposed unit. This would exceed the standard parking stall length of 19 feet, and would thus allow for parking of standard-sized vehicles on the driveways. Haberman Comment 5 The comment notes that the proposed project would receive a concession to develop smaller lots as part of the State Density Bonus Law. The comment suggests further decrease to the proposed lot and unit sizes to allow for proper street and driveway improvements. The comment explains that this would result in a reduced burden for adjacent streets and neighbors. The comment suggests smaller lots and homes to allow for wider streets. As explained in the responses above, the IS/MND did not identify any potential circulation hazards that would require additional mitigation. Haberman Comment 6 c. Ann Keeler Keeler Comment 1 The commenter states that there appears to be a flock of band tail pigeons at the property. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 19 Band-tailed pigeons (Patagioenas fasciata) are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Mitigation Measure Biology 3 includes pre-construction survey requirements to avoid impacts to birds protected pursuant to the MBTA that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. d. Lisa Shikany Shikany Comment 1 The comment remarks that they specifically requested for neighbor Jeanne Shikany to be notified of activities pertaining to the proposed project in addition to themselves in an email on May 8, 2022. The comment states that Jeanne Shikany did not receive any notification, and that the County is required to provide adequate notice to anyone requesting it and failed to do so in this case. The project was noticed to the commenter as requested. This is evidenced by the fact that the commenter responded to the notice and is listed on the notification list for the project. Shikany Comment 2 The comment states that the County failed to provide the complete Draft IS/MND for public review, and that copies of the various reports prepared to address the impacts of this proposed project were not available, including the addendum to the previous biological assessment, thereby limiting the public’s ability to review and comment on the proposed project. The IS/MND and all reports were available during the noticing period. The IS/MND was posted on the County’s website and all reports were available upon request. Shikany Comment 3 The comment compares the prior 2007 and 2009 proposal to the proposed project. It states that the 2007 and 2009 proposal better promoted privacy, protected the riparian area, minimized tree removal, and matched the community character with a lower density. Furthermore, the comment notes that the prior project sponsor facilitated better communication with the neighboring residents regarding project concerns and that the current project sponsor has not contacted the neighborhood community. The comment notes that the proposed project contains twice the number of subdivisions, includes setback and lot size waivers and a moderate- ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 20 income home for the purposes of achieving maximum unit density. The comment notes that the project site contains sensitive habitats and wildlife and that the proposed project removes trees and habitats with no space for replacement. The comment also notes that the proposed project is out of character with the surrounding area. The proposed project by design is denser that the previously approved subdivision of the project site. The project has been designed with densities and development standards that are consistent with the State Density Bonus Law as discussed previously. Shikany Comment 4 The comment states that the applicant did not address neighborhood concerns related to design. The applicant has redesigned the project in response to comments from neighbors and CDFW. As detailed in the BRA Addendum, with the updated mitigations, the project is not expected to have a significant impact on the environment. Additionally, the applicant has responded to adjacent neighbor’s requests for privacy fencing and relocation of proposed residences to address privacy concerns. Shikany Comment 5 The comment states the long-term impacts to sensitive habitats and the wildlife that currently utilize them are not addressed in the IS/MND. Specific impacts and mitigation measures have been identified and would be implemented as part of the project. These mitigations have been designed for the specific circumstances of the subject property, including the biological impact mitigations based on the species that could be located on the subject property. Shikany Comment 6 The comment states that the IS/MND does not incorporate mitigation measures such as riparian corridor fencing and a deed restriction prohibiting development, which would have provided long-term protection to Grayson Creek. Mitigation measures for the protection of Grayson Creek have been incorporated into the project. These mitigation measures include the requirement for a Stormwater Control Plan to protect water quality, a lighting plan to limit nighttime light impacts on the creek, and tree planting and landscape plans for restitution/mitigation for removed trees. Though the project does not include the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 21 mitigations requested by the commenter, a less than significant impact is expected as discussed in the IS/MND and supported by the Biological Resources Assessment Addendum. Shikany Comment 7 The comment expresses concern about the lack of sidewalks and pedestrian safety on Grayson Road due to the density of the proposed project. The IS/MND Transportation section describes that the proposed project would generate an additional 8 AM and 8 PM new peak period trips, which was determined to be a less than significant impact on circulation. The proposed project includes a 5-foot-wide, elevated sidewalk along the proposed new roadway. It would also include a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping. The County’s Complete Streets policy requires streets to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right-of-way for each category of users. The IS/MND describes that the proposed project would comply with this requirement. Furthermore, the proposed project qualifies for one exemption or concession from the County pursuant to the Density Bonus Law. The project applicant requested that they provide asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle land striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. The commenter raises concerns, which state that the County can reject a concession request if there would be an adverse impact on public safety. The project frontage is located in excess of 1,000 feet away to the east to the nearest sidewalks. As a result of the isolation, an isolated sidewalk along the project frontage would not provide pedestrians, cyclists, or vehicles with a safer travel experience along Grayson Road. The proposed alternative improvements would provide a safe path for both cyclists and pedestrians. As such, the applicant can legally request this concession, and the County is required to approve it. Shikany Comment 8 The comment states that the concept of a Vesting Tentative Map, which constitutes the plans provided by the proposed project, should be described to the public in the IS/MND’s project description. Specifically, the comment requests that it be disclosed that a Vesting Tentative Map allows the proposed project not to comply with any future changes in regulations following the proposed project’s approval. The comment states that the applicant should be required to provide additional project details in exchange for these Vesting Tentative Map benefits and that the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 22 County should justify why the proposed project is granted the use of a Vesting Tentative Map. In addition to the issuance of a vesting tentative map being a regular and expected part of approving a subdivision in the County, and the proposed project is consistent with the requirements of Contra Costa County Municipal Code Section 94-2.204 which state the required information for the subdivision of land. CEQA does not require that an IS/MND disclose more details in the case that a Vesting Tentative Map is used. Shikany Comment 9 The comment states that the project description provided in the Draft IS/MND lacks sufficient detail to serve as the basis for addressing potential project impacts, and many project details are mentioned only in the analysis sections. The commenter does not go into specific detail with this comment. Responses to specific comments regarding missing items in the IS/MND project description are included in the other responses to this comment letter. Shikany Comment 10 The comment states that the IS/MND’s project description has missing details and is fragmented. The comment specifically references the fact that accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are not referenced in the project description. No ADUs will be developed as part of the proposed project, and thus are not considered as part of the project description for the IS/MND. Shikany Comment 10 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND does not state the distance from the Creek to the riparian corridor setback, nor does it describe the width of the riparian corridor that was previously proposed to be protected through mitigation measures. The proposed project would implement a 50-foot setback from the Grayson Creek centerline. This has been incorporated into the project description in the IS/MND and is shown on the VTM. No adverse impacts were identified for the proposed project and no additional mitigation is necessary to reduce impacts to below a level of significance. The IS/MND is not required to incorporate measures proposed in a CEQA document for a previous project. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 23 Shikany Comment 11 The comment states that the IS/MND project description does not mention the waiver of setback for retaining walls included in the land use section. Furthermore, the comment states that the Draft IS/MND does not describe the location of the retaining walls. The Vesting Tentative Map shows the location of the proposed retaining walls. Though not described in the project description, the waiver is shown in the Land Use Section of the IS/MND in the table of development standards. Shikany Comment 12 The comment states that much of the proposed project’s site plan lacks labels for many of the lines shown, including, but not limited to, the top of the creek bank and the centerline of the creek channel. The comment is noted but does not impact the environmental analysis for the project. All impacts and mitigations would be expected to remain the same. Shikany Comment 12 The comment states that the IS/MND project description misses information regarding riparian, oak woodland, and other protected habitat and vegetation on the project site. Furthermore, the IS/MND project description does not describe any wildlife that utilizes the project site. The comment states that this information should be in the project description, not the analysis sections. Information on protected habitats, wildlife, and vegetation are found the Biological Resources section of the IS/MND. The proposed project, including the identified mitigation measures, was designed to accommodate a 50-foot creek setback to avoid impacts to the adjacent Grayson Creek and surrounding habitat to the greatest extent feasible, including the avoidance of trees within the riparian corridor. Shikany Comment 13 The comment states that the description of the area surrounding the project site, that it is single-family residential development, is vague and inaccurate. The commenter states that the adjacent area in unincorporated Contra Costa County has a lower density and smaller unit size than the adjacent area within the City of Pleasant Hill and that the proposed project would not be consistent with the density of the surrounding homes in unincorporated Contra Costa County. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 24 The project description states that the surrounding area consists of single-family homes, which is accurate. The difference in density and size of the surrounding homes in Contra Costa County in comparison to the surrounding homes in the City of Pleasant Hill is noted. However, the project site and the surrounding areas to the south have a land use designation of Single-Family Residential–Low (SL), and are zoned as R-15. The R-15 zoning designation is primarily for single-family detached homes, and permits a unit density of 1.0 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The Density Bonus Law allows for increased density of the proposed project to 3.28 dwelling units per acre. As such, the proposed density is consistent with the SL land use designation. Shikany Comment 14 The comment states that the IS/MND has not listed a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW, and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as required discretionary approvals. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND states that a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW is required. The Hydrology and Water Quality section outlines RWQCB requirements to implement stormwater controls. The proposed project’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan would be approved as part of the Construction General Permit from the RWQCB. Shikany Comment 15 The comment states that while classified as an urban area by the Census Bureau, the visual character of the project area is still relatively rural, with significant tree cover and larger lots. The comment states that the project’s density and home size is inconsistent with the immediate surrounding area. The comment also states that solely considering lot size when determining aesthetic impacts is misleading and that the density and size of the proposed homes is not consistent with the surrounding development in unincorporated Contra Costa County. The analysis in the IS/MND considers numerous issues when evaluating potential aesthetic impacts. As explained in the Aesthetics section of the IS/MND, the proposed project would comply with applicable zoning and other regulations concerning aesthetics with certain concessions to the R-15 zoning development standards allowed by the Density Bonus Law. Additionally, the proposed project would include a landscaping plan that will enhance the aesthetic character to maintain adequate screening and privacy in the area. The aesthetic difference between the property and other less dense properties in the area, thus, would not be considered a significant environmental impact. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 25 Shikany Comment 16 The comment states that the density of the development must be reduced for the proposed project to not degrade the existing visual character. The comment states that lot size, width, and setback waivers could then be eliminated, and increased setbacks from the creek to the proposed residential development could also be accomplished. The project site and the surrounding areas to the south have a land use designation of Single-Family Residential–Low (SL), and are zoned as R-15. The R-15 zoning designation is primarily for single-family detached homes, and permits a unit density of 1.0 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The Density Bonus Law allows for increased density of the proposed project to 3.28 dwelling units per acre. As such, the proposed density is consistent with the SL land use designation. A change in the visual character from largely undeveloped to more developed would be consistent with the surrounding area and is, thus, not expected to be a significant visual impact. Shikany Comment 17 The comment requests that if a landscaping plan is used to make a less than significant determination in the aesthetics analysis, the proposed project should have measurable performance standards, and that the requirement for “adequate planting of trees and other landscaping” is not a measurable performance standard, and that there needs to be a clear and detailed definition of “adequate.” The landscaping plan would be reviewed for adequacy prior to issuance of a building permit for the project. The plan would have to meet County Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance requirements which provide planting details for each area of the property, and would include the requirements of Mitigation Measure Biology 2, including the planning of approximately 54 native riparian woodland trees. The Mitigation Measure prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodland in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with a replacement tree planting plan that shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. This implementation includes bonding to ensure that the plantings are viable or replaced. Thus, the landscaping plan would have measurable performance standards and is reasonably considered a justification as why the project aesthetic impacts would be less than significant. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 26 Shikany Comment 18 The comment states that the Mitigation Measure Aesthetics-1 does not provide lighting standards that prevent light from spilling out onto the creek and riparian corridor. The mitigation measure clearly identifies what design standards are required for the lighting plan, including that all lights be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements. Shikany Comment 19 The commenter states that no reports were attached to the MND, and thus, the public was restricted in their ability to comment on the findings. All non-confidential appendices and technical reports may be released to the public upon request. Shikany Comment 20 The commenter states that there is no discussion regarding what public agencies with jurisdiction over potentially impacted resources were consulted about this project prior to completion of the initial study. The County notices all public agencies with potential jurisdiction over the project upon initial review of the application. As discussed in the agency comment section of the is staff report, agencies have provided comments regarding the standards and requirements under their purview. The discussion of these standards is mentioned throughout the IS/MND as applicable in each section. Shikany Comment 21 This commenter states that the proposed project could have significant adverse permanent effects and will preclude reestablishment of existing habitat. The commenter further states that the IS/MND only addresses temporary construction impacts, and not permanent adverse impacts, and that there is no analysis of the impacts of noise, lights, and other residential activities on what habitat and wildlife will remain, as well as on reestablishment of destroyed habitat (for example, residential uses leave no room for replanting of removed trees.). The impact of noise, lights, and other residential activities are addressed in the BRA Addendum and the IS/MND. Site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor through trespass, impacts associated with lighting and ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 27 structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, to be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements to be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off-site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Mitigation Measure Biology-6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 requires on-site replacement of trees removed at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with trees spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. Tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 7 prescribes the planting of Valley Oak Woodland species within all on-site undeveloped areas. Project design includes the avoidance of approximately 30 percent of the on-site trees, all other trees will be replaced. Implementation of the project design (including avoidance measures) and the two abovementioned mitigation measures minimize impacts to on-site trees and woodlands through avoidance and replacement, which reduces the magnitude of permanent tree/habitat removal. Thus, the IS/MND does consider and mitigate for both temporary and permanent biological resource impacts. Shikany Comment 22 The commenter states that there is no analysis or mitigation to address likely intrusions by residents into the riparian corridor that would be facilitated by the close proximity of proposed homes with shallow rear yards to the riparian corridor, and that a thorough analysis of ongoing residential impacts must be provided. As discussed in the previous response, project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Shikany Comment 23 The commenter states that the habitat types listed add up to 2.61 acres, yet the project site is listed as 3.05 acres, and questions what is occurring on the missing 0.44 acre? ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 28 Land Cover Types listed include 3.05 acres of Developed Land, Mixed Woodland, Valley Oak Woodland, and Riparian Woodland. The breakdown of the acreage is provided below: • Developed (.21 acre) • Mixed Woodland (0.62 acre) • Valley Oak Woodland (1.18 acres) • Riparian Woodland (1.01 acres) This is not considered significant new information and all impacts related to the land cover types were considered within he biological resource assessment for the project. Shikany Comment 24 The commenter questions how avoidance measures reference in Mitigation Measure Biology-1 will be implemented in the case that rare plants are found. They also ask what is proposed to be done with salvaged seed or root stock, given the development in the surrounding area. They ask if vegetation replacement for sensitive plants would occur in the riparian corridor. Mitigation Measure Biology-1 states that if CNPS-Ranked species are observed on- site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. Impacts to special-status species will be avoided through salvage of seeds or individual plants (root stock) in coordination with a qualified institution capable of propagating these species for planting off-site in protected environs. In addition, if CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, the project proponent proposes to prepare a plan to accomplish salvage and relocation/replacement that states methods of salvage, storage, and replacement planting of seeds or plants, and to identify receptor sites, set target numbers to be established, describe monitoring methods, and define requirements for maintenance and annual monitoring reports. Additionally, protocol rare plant surveys were conducted in 2023 by JMC Botanist Haley Henderson resulted in negative findings for rare plants. Ms. Henderson conducted appropriately timed focused floristic surveys on March 23, May 9, and June 8, 2023. Surveys were conducted to ensure that the primary bloom window was covered for each of the regionally known special-status plant species with potentially suitable habitat on the project site. No special-status plant species were observed during these focused floristic surveys, or previously conducted general ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 29 site surveys. Shikany Comment 25 The commenter states that the language in Mitigation Measure Biology 2, which requires replacement of on-site riparian woodland and Valley Oak Woodland to the greatest extent practicable, contains nebulous language and asks the following questions: What determines what is or is not practicable? Will the developer be allowed to argue that it is not practicable to replace any of the trees, or half of the trees? Mitigation Measure Biology 2 calls for trees removed from the riparian woodland to be “replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable.” The practicability of in-kind and on-site planting is the issue to be considered, not the replacement ratio. A tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. The landscape professional would be adequately qualified to determine the practicability of planting replacements. Shikany Comment 26 The commenter states that project mitigation should call for avoidance of removing the habitat on the project site by removing multiple lots from the development, and the County is not obligated to allow the proposed density and that CEQA requires avoidance as a first step in mitigating project impacts The Density Bonus project is consistent with the allowed density on the project site and is an infill project within a developed residential neighborhood. Though lots could be removed from the development proposal resulting in less impacts to the habitat on the site, the project as proposed and mitigated is not expected to have a significant impact on biological resources. Shikany Comment 27 The commenter asks where the 158 trees being replace will be planted. They note that replacement trees in the riparian corridor would need to be evaluated for impacts to the existing habitat. They question the feasibility of planting replacement trees on-site, and list reasons that Mitigation Measure Biology-2 is not achievable. They further describe that the impact of removing the trees must be analyzed and location of replacement trees must be documented. They state that it must be documented how trees will be protected from removal. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 30 Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes that planted trees shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits. A tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. The majority of the project site is regularly disked, occurs within a matrix of suburban development, and includes existing on-site residential development. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 requires on-site replacement of trees removed at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with trees spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 7 prescribes the planting of Valley Oak Woodland species within all on-site undeveloped areas. Multiple trees on the project site will be preserved and others will be replaced. Implementation of the project design (including avoidance measures) and the two abovementioned mitigation measures minimize impacts to on-site trees and woodlands through replacement plantings, which reduces the magnitude of permanent tree/habitat removal. Shikany Comment 28 This comment lists performance standards that they believe must be included in Mitigation Measure Biology 2. In addition to the details regarding the landscaping plan outlined in the previous response, the trees planted as mitigation would be monitored, maintained, and replaced as needed. Recorded Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will provide a perpetual source of funding and responsibility for the trees. The required annual inspection (to be conducted prior to October 1 every year), ongoing maintenance, and the requirement to provide for the replacement of the mitigation trees will be included in the CC&Rs recorded against each of the proposed properties. A copy of the CC&R(s) will be provided to the County prior to installation of the permanent fencing. Shikany Comment 29 The commenter states that Mitigation Measure Biology 4 and Mitigation Measure Biology 5 should be rewritten to be very clear about what must occur regarding special-status amphibians and reptiles. As discussed in the IS/MND immediately proceeding Mitigation Measure Biology 4 and Biology 5, USFWS-approved capture and relocation would occur if species are found. The qualified biologist or biological monitor that is required by the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 31 mitigations would ensure that all workers at the project site are aware of the required protocols for western pond turtle and Alameda whipsnake. Shikany Comment 30 The commenter states that replanting oak woodland in the riparian corridor would be inappropriate. They state that several lots of the proposed project must be removed in order to fulfill Mitigation Measure Biology-7. As discussed above, the replanting plan would be prepared by a qualified landscape professional to determine practicability of the replantings. The professional would identify appropriate locations for the replantings on the site to ensure the health of the replantings. All replantings would be monitored for viability and would be replaced if necessary. Shikany Comment 31 The commenter states that tree cutting resulting in deposition of debris in the creek channel occurred while the developer was working on permitting the subdivision, as reported by adjoining neighbors. The commenter states that the Arborist Report, the BRA, and the MND do not address this. The commenter asks if this was considered when the biological report was updated in 2022. A dead Monterey pine tree that was considered a safety hazard was removed from the site on October 28, 2021. Removal of this dead tree was not done as part of project activities. This work would be considered regular management and maintenance of the site. Shikany Comment 32 The commenter states that several oak trees in the riparian corridor would be removed and questions whether some of these trees can be retained, per recommendations of the Arborist Report. The proposed project was designed to accommodate a 50-foot creek setback to avoid impacts to the adjacent Grayson Creek to the greatest extent feasible, including the avoidance of trees within the riparian corridor. Because root zones of trees within the corridor may be impacted by construction of project elements occurring outside of the creek setback, and accordingly, their removal was recommended by the Arborist. Additionally, tree No. 136 is a non-native silver dollar eucalyptus (Eucalyptus cinerea) with a failed trunk, and tree No. 194 and No. 195 are dying Siberian elms (Ulmus sp.). Furthermore, these non-native trees were recommended for removal by the Arborist due to health and location within the ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 32 grading limits. Trees No. 137 and No. 138 are native oaks that occur very adjacent to the top of bank of Grayson Creek and the proposed project was designed to avoid trees such as these. Native oaks, tree No. 114, No. 115, No. 116, No. 169, and NO. 169b occur approximately between 50 and 80 feet beyond the centerline of Grayson Creek, making project planning of to avoid impacts to these trees (including their root systems) infeasible. If it is determined that additional native trees can be protected in place while still achieving project objectives (as determined by the project Arborist in coordination with the Construction Manager and the project proponent), the project proponent will determine if additional trees can be saved based upon the potential impacts from the grading to the root structure of the trees by “field-fit” grading activities to the greatest extent practicable to conduct such avoidance. This requirement would be included as a condition of approval. Shikany Comment 33 The commenter states that the IS/MND contains no description of how the riparian setback was established, and no description of the width of the riparian setback from the creek channel, centerline, or from the top of bank. They state that neither the creek centerline nor the top of bank are shown on the development plans. In some areas, the extent of riparian canopy extends far beyond the top of bank of Grayson Creek (such as in the southwestern corner of the project site), while in others, the riparian canopy is minimal and the top of bank is beyond the extent of riparian canopy. It appears the commentor is equating the riparian corridor and the creek structure setback; however, these are not equivalent. The County does not require a “riparian setback.” However, the project design incorporates a required 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. The centerline of Grayson creek is depicted and labeled on the development plans. Shikany Comment 34 The commenter states that Figure 11 of the Biological Report shows the top of bank either commensurate with or extending beyond the riparian setback, which apparently is the drip line of the trees that were determined to comprise the northerly boundary of the riparian corridor. The commenter cites Policy 8.89 of the General Plan Conservation Element requires a minimum 50-foot setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek. The commenter asks how the proposed riparian setback compares to the minimum 50-foot setback. In some areas, the extent of riparian canopy extends far beyond the top of bank of ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 33 Grayson Creek (such as in the southwestern corner of the project site), while in others, the riparian canopy is minimal and the top of bank is beyond the extent of riparian canopy. It appears the commentor is equating the riparian corridor and the creek structure setback; however, these are not equivalent. The County does not require a “riparian setback.” However, the project design incorporates a required 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. Shikany Comment 35 The commenter states that the IS/MND needs to clarify the difference between the riparian setback area and the creek structure setback line, and what can occur within each area. The describe that the project plans show the limit of the riparian area with a note that no grading will be allowed and that beyond that line, the plans show the creek structure setback line. They state that this means grading is allowed up to and below the top of the creek bank, which they state is inappropriate and requires extension of the riparian setback area to a point beyond the top of bank. The proposed project includes a single setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. This setback includes the restriction of construction of aboveground permanent elements such as roads/driveways and structures to be a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of Grayson Creek. While project implementation would require grading and tree removal within the riparian corridor, all grading activities are proposed to remain well outside of top of bank (a minimum of 20 feet). The County’s Creek Structure Setback requires a setback that is defined as a point where a line with slope of 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical, extending from the toe of the channel, intersects the existing ground plus 30 feet horizontal. Shikany Comment 36 The commenter asks if the County has determined that Grayson Creek, or the portion within the proposed subdivision, is a “protected watercourse” and if it requires protection pursuant to County Code Section 914-4.002. The commenter asks for a rationale if it is not protected. Grayson Creek is not identified as a “protected watercourse” within any publicly available maps, reports, or databases. Though the County, in its sole discretion may designate a natural watercourse as a “protected watercourse,” Grayson Creek has not been designated. Additionally, the protections for the creek from the required Creek Structure Setback and Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) would provide preservation of the resource. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 34 Shikany Comment 37 The commenter states that the IS/MND does not address impacts associated with the establishment and ongoing activities of permanent residential uses close to Grayson Creek and does not address that the proposed residential lots include the riparian area. They state that due to the setback waivers coupled with the number of lots proposed, there is little rear yard on the majority of the lots, which could encourage the use of the riparian area as part of the homes backyards. Site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor from potential usage, impacts associated with lighting and structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, to be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements to be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off-site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Mitigation Measure Biology 6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. Shikany Comment 38 The commenter states that a permanent fence was previously proposed by Mitigation Measure Biology 6, but is no longer included as a mitigation measure. The comment asks how the County would ensure that future property owners do not extend their backyards into the protection riparian area. The commenter provides multiple questions about the design of the fence and questions why the fence was removed and how the County intends to protect the riparian area from extension of the proposed lots. The proposed project would incorporate a fence along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. As this fence is part of project plans, it is no longer considered a mitigation measure. Furthermore, the perpetual exclusion of residents from the creek is not necessary given the requirements of the creek structure setback which would provide adequate protection of a majority of the riparian area. Shikany Comment 39 The commenter states that it appears that a deed restriction of the creek structure setback is no longer required by Mitigation Measure Biology-6 and asks for clarification. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 35 All the properties within the creek structure setback would be subject to deed restrictions (as required by County Code and as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map) prohibiting the property owners from developing the portion of their properties occurring within the setback, including the construction of permanent structures such as ADUs, pools, fences, etc. Shikany Comment 40 The commenter states that the less than significant impact to State and federally protected wetlands is based on a number of project features that are not adequate. No State or federally protected wetlands occur within the development area of the project site. While project implementation would result in impacts to the riparian corridor associated with Grayson Creek, it would avoid direct impacts (fill or modification) to Grayson Creek. Shikany Comment 41 The commenter speculates that future homeowners will unlawfully expand their backyards into the deed-restricted creek structure setback. The commenter asks how expansion of backyards into the setback area will be monitored and prevented. The proposed project would include an enforceable deed restriction in addition to local land use controls to prevent unauthorized land uses. All structures requiring a building permit would be vetted by County staff during review, including enforcement of the setback. Shikany Comment 42 The commenter states that Sheet 4 of the development plans provides information as to how the creek structure setback was calculated, and question the basis for the location of the cross-sections, how the number and location of cross-sections was determined to be adequate for the establishment of the structure setback lines, and how it was determined that the entire creek section is adequately represented by these cross-sections. The extent of the creek structure setback was calculated from the top of bank, which was determined in accordance with Title 9, Division 914 (§§ 914-14.010, 914- 14.012, 914-14.014) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Because the height of the TOB is less than 20 feet above the channel invert, the required horizontal distance between top of bank and the setback line is 30 feet. The entire ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 36 creek corridor was mapped to determine the extent of top of bank, and accordingly the extent of the creek structure setback. While the creek structure set back was determined by location the top of bank, functionally the creek structure setback occurs at a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of the Grayson Creek channel. Shikany Comment 43 The commenter states that County Code Section 914-14.012(d) states that where significant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required by Section (c) of this same section (the limits the subdivision utilizes), the County may extend the setback line to include such areas. The commenter asks what the basis was for not requiring this additional area, given the number of oaks and other trees that are proposed to be removed, since the trees being removed have crowns that are part of the riparian canopy? The County has discretion in determining the Creek Structure Setback. To accommodate the proposed Density Bonus Project, the use of a majority of the project site was required and additional setback would have made the project infeasible. Shikany Comment 44 The commenter states that, while the IS/MND properly notes that the Grayson Creek riparian area serves as a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursey sites, it does not acknowledge that the oak woodland provides nesting habitat for migrating birds and other wildlife that utilizes the property. The BRA Addendum identifies that a nursery site is an area where juveniles occur at higher densities, avoid predation more successfully, or grow faster there than in a different habitat. While the project site is regularly disked, the trees, shrubs, and structures occurring on-site as well as the Grayson Creek riparian corridor have been identified as supporting suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats. Mitigation Measures Biology 2, Biology 3, Biology 4, Biology 5, and Biology 8, which requires tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to nursery sites as well as all nesting, roosting, and dispersing wildlife. Shikany Comment 45 The commenter asks how the removal of most of the existing habitat on the site and development of residential uses with a narrow riparian corridor would not impede use of wildlife corridors and nursey sites located at the project site. They ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 37 ask if the 0.8 acre of riparian corridor that would remain would be sufficient to address all current wildlife migration and nursery uses on the project site, even though it would have residential uses directly adjacent to it. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor has been identified as a potential wildlife corridor and nursery site; the remainder of the project site has not been identified as either a wildlife corridor or a nursery site. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor would remain largely untouched by implementation of the proposed project, with the exception of construction within 0.21 acre of riparian habitat (necessitating riparian tree removal along its northern boundary) and implementation of a riparian tree planting plan to mitigate impacts to trees. Furthermore, the infill project is surrounded by residential development. Shikany Comment 46 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND is missing information regarding the connectivity of Grayson Creek with off-site portions of watercourse and habitats for fish. The proposed project would not alter Grayson Creek or interfere with the movement of off-site wildlife through the portion of Grayson Creek that is located on the project site. The comment does not provide any basis for finding the proposed project would impact special-status species wildlife movement through the site. Shikany Comment 47 The commenter states that Mitigation Measure Biology 2 through Biology 6 call for tree replacement, but that the requirement is unachievable. The tree replacement would occur as discussed in the responses above. The replacement would be enforceable and implementable. Shikany Comment 48 The commenter states that the IS/MND does not include post-construction measures for protection of the riparian area. The Creek Structure Setback would be recorded against the proposed properties in perpetuity. Additionally, the tree replanting would be monitored and bonded to ensure the health of replacement trees, and CC&Rs for the project would include maintaining the trees on the property. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 38 Shikany Comment 49 The commenter states that the previous MND required fencing along the riparian boundary and a deed restriction of the creek structure setback area prohibiting development. As discussed above, the fence is proposed as part of the project and the Creek Structure Setback would be recorded against the properties as part of the VTM. Shikany Comment 50 The commenter states that the proposed project poses a potentially significant impact to the movement of wildlife, and the less than significant impact conclusion in the IS/MND is not fully supported. As discussed above, site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor from potential usage, impacts associated with lighting and structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, and Mitigation Measure Biology 6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. With the implementation of these measures, the BRA Addendum for the project determined that the impact would be less than significant. Shikany Comment 51 The commenter states that the discussion of wildlife impacts does not mention CEQA Section 21083.4 regarding the protection and mitigation of impacts to oak woodland. CEQA Section 21083.4 requires that the County determine whether a project within its jurisdiction may result in a conversion of oak woodlands that will have a significant effect on the environment and allows for the County to develop suitable measures to mitigate those impacts as well as the mitigation of impacts to oak woodland through the planting of “an appropriate number of trees.” Mitigation Measure Biology 2 calles for the replacement of native trees at a 3:1 ratio and the non-native trees at a 1:1 ratio and is consistent with County practice and implementation of its tree protection and preservation ordinance. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 39 Shikany Comment 52 The commenter states that General Plan Policy 8-6 requires significant trees to be preserved, yet over 72 percent of the 117 trees on-site will be removed and 17 of the remaining trees will be subject to dripline encroachment. The commenter states that the project does not preserve significant trees and vegetation. The commenter also discusses that tree replacement is impossible at the rate required by General Plan Policy 8-12 and that the proposed residential lots should be reduced by half to mitigate this impact. The project design includes retention and preservation of the greatest number of trees practicable while also accommodating the Density Bonus Project. Mitigation Measure Biology 9 calls for trees retained and preserved, but subjected to dripline encroachment, to be monitoring by the project Arborist during encroachment and all damage to trees scheduled for preservation will be appropriately mitigated. In balancing the many policies identified in the General Plan, including the interest of providing adequate housing for the residents of the County, the impact to trees and vegetation on the project site and mitigation of it are reasonable. Shikany Comment 53 The commenter explains that one of the reasons tree removal can be approved according to County Code is “reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot.” The commenter asks what determines “reasonable development” and states that the proposed project could utilize smaller development footprints to avoid such extensive tree and habitat removal. The commenter states that CEQA requires avoidance of environmental impacts as a first step, but that there seems to be no consideration or discussion of how removal of trees or habitat could be avoided, nor any justification provided for their removal. The commenter states that the density of the proposed project needs to be significantly reduced. The proposed project has been designed to avoid impacts to natural habitats and resources where feasible. Project design elements include incorporating a structure setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek of a minimum of 50 feet, as well as avoidance and preservation of many trees and tree clusters, and isolation of the residential development from the preserved riparian corridor. Shikany Comment 54 The comment states that the neighborhood does not have adequate bike lanes and ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 40 sidewalks to travel to a nearby commercial district and the Pleasant Hill Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station, and states that walking on Grayson Road is dangerous given the excessive traffic. The comment further questions if there is a bike lane that fully connects to the Pleasant Hill BART station. The IS/MND thoroughly evaluated potential safety issues that would result from the proposed project. The proposed project would comply with applicable County General Plan policies outlined in the Public Safety Element. The applicant would install bicycle lane striping as part of the proposed project. Furthermore, there is no sidewalk to the east for over 1,000 feet and no bike lanes or sidewalks that fully connects to the Pleasant Hill BART station which is over 3.5 miles to the east. It would be unreasonable for the project, which only includes 8 additional residences, to implement improvements that connect the development to this area. Shikany Comment 55 The comment states that the proposed waiver for the construction of sidewalks on the proposed project’s frontage to Grayson Road is inappropriate given that the proposed project’s density would create an increased need for sidewalks along Grayson Road. The comment adds that if sidewalks are developed in the area in the future, they would be unjustifiably installed at taxpayer expense. As stated previously, pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence. None of the conditions to deny the concession apply, thus, the County cannot reject the requested concession. Shikany Comment 56 The comment states that fire risk in the project area is high and contains significant vegetation and overhead power lines. The comment asks if power lines will be undergrounded on the project site. The comment further states that overhead power lines and vegetation surrounding the project site pose a risk regardless of the proposed project undergrounding power lines on-site. The comment argues that reduced yard setbacks, proposed high density development, and the placement of proposed development next to wooded areas would result in a high fire risk that could easily spread between proposed and existing houses. The Wildfire section of the IS/MND discusses how the site is within a designated High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and conducted an analysis of the proposed project’s fire risk accordingly. The analysis found that the proposed project would comply with the California Fire Code and California Building Standards Code to ensure that proposed development contains appropriate fire protections, and ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 41 would be reviewed by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) and other interested fire protection agencies in accordance with County General Plan Measure 7-au. The IS/MND determined that all new utility infrastructure that would serve the proposed project would be undergrounded, minimizing potential impacts to fire risk. Furthermore, the IS/MND analyzes vegetation risk to wildfire as well, and determined that the proposed project would be subject to the CCCFPD Ordinance, which would include design standards and management regulations such as weed abatement and brush clearance regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. As such, impacts from on-site vegetation on fire risk would be minimized to a less than significant level. Lastly, adjacent existing overhead power lines constitute the existing conditions of the project area and would not be altered by the proposed project. As such, wildfire risks related to these overhead power lines would not be affected by the proposed project and are thus not within the scope of the IS/MND’s environmental analysis. Shikany Comment 57 The commenter states that the claim in the IS/MND that fire risk will be reduced by vegetation removal demonstrates that the County is not committed to re- establishing habitats that would be removed as a result of the proposed project. The commenter questions whether the County actually intends to enforce the replacement mitigation. As stated in Mitigation Measure Biology 2, the proposed project would be required to submit a tree replacement plan and a landscape plan prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect, which would be prepared in compliance with the 2022 California Fire Code (CFC). The CFC includes specific requirements regarding fire- resistant landscaping and fire-resistant vegetation. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 states that most of the replacement trees would be various species of oak tree, which are considered fire-resistant trees, per the CFC. Tree replacement at the project site would not increase the risk of wildfire because it would be designed in compliance with the CFC and would adhere to the tree replacement and landscape plans required by Mitigation Measure Biology 2. Shikany Comment 58 The comment states that the IS/MND does not address the increased fire risk brought to the entire County due to climate change and ongoing drought. As such, the comment finds it inappropriate to increase density on the project site. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 42 The comment pertaining to fire risk increases throughout the County due to climate change and ongoing drought are speculative and therefore outside the scope of the IS/MND. The comment does not provide any specific information related to whether the proposed project would materially affect evacuation routes in the area or impact any existing wildfire issues. The IS/MND discusses that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to fire risk, for the reasons discussed above. Shikany Comment 59 The comment states that the proposed project would interfere with the groundwater supplies and recharge given the increase of impervious surfaces the project proposes and given the direction of stormwater runoff from impermeable surfaces into the storm drain system. The proposed project’s Hydrology and Stormwater Control Plan shows the proposed bioretention basin would be constructed as a flow-through planter following specifications found in the County Clean Water Program Technical Guidance Handbook. As such, a portion of stormwater runoff flowing through the bioretention basin would permeate through the basin and provide groundwater recharge, and the other portion of stormwater would continue into the public stormwater drainage system. Therefore, the analysis made in the IS/MND is correct, and impacts pertaining to groundwater recharge from implementation of the proposed project are less than significant. Shikany Comment 60 The commenter is concerned that the proposed project could impact the amount of stormwater runoff feeding into Grayson Creek and change the drainage pattern of the project site. The proposed project stormwater runoff would not increase the peak flow rates from the added impervious surface area as a result of the biofiltration basin proposed for the project. Post-Development runoff of the proposed project would match or reduce the pre-development. The required detention volume of 555 cubic feet has been determined and is identified the project SWCP. The SWCP demonstrates that the proposed project would contain adequate facilities to accommodate the post-project stormwater runoff. Shikany Comment 61 The comment asserts that the County’s density calculation is incorrect, stating that ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 43 the County used 2.99 dwelling units per acre rather than 2.9 as stated in the Draft IS/MND resulting in 8.28 units per acre, rounded to nine base units for this subdivision. The comment states that net average calculations for the proposed project are incorrect, finding that 0.29 acre for the street and 1.5 deed -restricted acres for the Grayson Creek structure setback area would need to be removed from the project site’s gross area for an accurate net acreage calculation. The Density Bonus Law defines base density as “gross density” (Government Code § 65915(f)). Assembly Bill (AB) 2501, a bill signed into law in 2016, clarified that a "density bonus" means an increase over the maximum allowable gross residential density. Moreover, the Density Bonus Law states that it “shall be interpreted liberally in favor of producing the maximum number of total housing units” (Government Code § 65915(r)). Therefore, under the Density Bonus Law the County must honor the applicant’s request to utilize the gross acreage of the parcel and the associated calculation of the maximum allowable gross density. The calculation must be based upon the total acreage of the project site and not reduced by the required County roadway dedications. Shikany Comment 62 The commenter states that a mitigation measure requiring a creek structure setback area be protected from development via a permanent deed restriction and dedication of development rights to the County should be added back to the Draft IS/MND. The Creek Structure Setback is required by the County Code and it is not necessary or appropriate to include it as a separate mitigation measure. Shikany Comment 63 The comment states that given the number of lots, the waiver on lot width creates lot widths completely inconsistent with the surrounding area. As explained in the IS/MND Land Use and Planning section, the minimum lot size, lot width, depth, retaining wall setbacks, and front and side yard setbacks for the R- 15 zoning designation would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density. As such, the proposed project is granted waivers to these standards pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law. Shikany Comment 64 The comment requests clarification on the need for setback requirement waiver for retaining walls. The comment asks where these retaining walls would be located. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 44 Waivers to the R-15 zoning designation are provided under State Density Bonus Law if a project is physically precluded from occurring due to zoning requirements, as is the case with the setback requirement for retaining walls. As described previously, pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence. Shikany Comment 65 The comment states that the baseline density stated by the Draft IS/MND of the project site, nine dwelling units, would not be able to meet R-15 zoning requirements for lot size, lot width, and setbacks. As such, the comment states that the project site’s baseline density would be illegal and cannot be considered. As discussed above, the project qualifies for waivers to development standards so that it can accommodate the level of density allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law. Shikany Comment 66 The comment questions how the County concluded that the inclusion of a moderate-income affordable lot into the proposed project drives the need for Density Bonus Law waivers when development standard waivers would still need to be in place to feasibly develop nine units, the established baseline density, on the project site. The comment also requests an explanation for the application of development standard waivers for all lots, and not just the proposed affordable unit lot. The Density Bonus Law allows waivers and concessions to R-15 zoning standards because an increased density often physically preclude a project from following all design standards for its land use and zoning designations. These waivers apply to all development in the proposed project to accommodate the increase in density permitted by the State Density Bonus Law, not solely to the proposed affordable housing. Shikany Comment 67 The comment states that waivers can only be granted if they result in no impacts to public health or safety. The comment explains that the waiver of sidewalk requirements on Grayson Road would negatively impact the public health and safety, particularly when the Draft IS/MND analyzes that the proposed project is within walking distance to nearby commercial districts. The comment requests an explanation of how the County intends to make the finding that the waiver for ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 45 sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road does not harm public health and safety. The proposed frontage improvements would allow for reasonably safe pedestrian and bicycle travel. Furthermore, the Density Bonus Law does not require findings for granting a concession. To reject a concession, a jurisdiction has to if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence. Given that the project includes frontage improvements that could safely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, the County cannot reasonably reject the concession request. Shikany Comment 68 The comment states that the inclusion of moderate-income housing into the proposed project is solely to maximize the proposed project’s density. Additionally, the comment finds that the proposed project’s waivers and concessions are made with the intention to facilitate more high-end housing, not create affordable housing. The comment further states that the proposed affordable unit is in the worst location and is the smallest lot and home in the subdivision and will reveal itself as being of a different income level to other proposed units. This comment addresses the project developer’s intentions regarding the Density Bonus Law and comments on the location of the affordable unit. These features are not relevant to the environmental analysis of the proposed project. Shikany Comment 69 The comment asks if the County has received proof that the requested Density Bonus Law incentives and waivers are financially necessary to construct the proposed affordable unit. The Density Bonus Law requires that the County must waive any development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a qualifying project, pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(e)(1). Shikany Comment 70 The comment states that the proposed project would result in a project site subdivision with significant unmitigated impacts to public trust resources, as well as impacts resulting from a development completely out of character with its surroundings, due to its extremely high density. The comment questions if the County allows for the development of projects with significant impacts to public trust resources for the purpose of including one affordable unit. Environmental impact concerns resulting from high density development are ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 46 addressed in the IS/MND. Furthermore, the project qualifies for the density bonus and the County does not have discretion in granting the allowed density. Shikany Comment 71 The comment states that the proposed project would contain impacts to the public’s health and safety that are against housing law. The comment questions how the County intends to address the health and safety impacts resulting from the density of the proposed project. The project is not expected to have unmitigated impacts to health and safety. The project is allowed for under the State’s Density Bonus Law to address the unmet need for housing throughout the state. The eight new residences on the infill site could be reasonable accommodated and mitigations are in place to reduce the impacts from the small project. Shikany Comment 72 The comment states that Table 1 of the IS/MND, Contra Costa County Ordinance Code R-15 Requirements, is misleading, as it does not contain the developable area for each lot. The comment continues that the usable area of many of these lots is no more than approximately half the lot, and in the case of Lots 3, 4, and 5 may be less than half the listed lot size. The comment surmises that the proposed project would result in a subdivision with a density and visual appearance that is not appropriate for the project site. The proposed density of the project is based on the area of the project site and allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law. The project would be considered consistent with the R-15 standards based on the waivers allowed for by the State Density Bonus Law. Shikany Comment 73 The comment explains concerns about the number of waivers and concessions that would be granted as part of the proposed project. The comment states that granting the proposed waivers is against the public interest and should be limited or denied. The project is allowed under the State Density Bonus Law. The number of concessions and waivers is consistent with the law in order to accommodate the level of density and affordable unit. The financial values of environmental impacts and features of the proposed project are not a part of the CEQA review. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 47 Shikany Comment 74 The comment requests for Mitigation Measure Noise 1 to be amended to have the County require the project developer or contractor to mail a notice to each nearby resident providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. Though the mitigation measure adequately reduces the noise impacts to less than significant levels, this requirement has been added as a condition of project approval. Shikany Comment 75 The comment states that the hours of operation for noise-producing activities are excessive, and requests that noise-producing activities during the week conclude at 6:00 p.m. The comment also requests that Saturday noise-generating activities occur between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The comment concludes that noise-generating activities should be limited according to the project area’s quiet surrounding neighborhood. The project would include standard conditions of approval that would limit the construction to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Shikany Comment 76 The commenter provides multiple concerns related to the lack of sidewalks along the project frontage. As discussed above, the concession request for alternative frontage improvements is allowed for under the State Density Bonus Law and can only be rejected if adequate findings are made by the County. Given that the project proposes alternative frontage improvements that provide for reasonably safe pedestrian and bicyclist travel along the project frontage, the County cannot reject the concession requested. Shikany Comment 77 The comment asks if there will be an addition of ADUs to the proposed project, as this would increase the trip generation and parking needs of the proposed project. The comment requests that the Draft IS/MND take any proposed ADU-related potential traffic impacts into account. No ADUs would be developed as part of the proposed project. As such, no ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 48 potential impacts are anticipated and no further action is required. Shikany Comment 78 The comment notes that while the proposed project would not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature, it would result in increased vehicle traffic. The comment notes that current driving from Mohawk Drive into Grayson Road is difficult due to existing traffic exceeding the 35 mile per hour (mph) speed limit established on Grayson Road. As such, the resulting intersection from the proposed road and Grayson Road would not provide sufficient stopping time for the speed of traffic traveling over the 35 mph speed limit. Therefore, the comment concludes that the proposed project would result in increased traffic risks to existing homes. Increase in traffic as a result of the proposed project is analyzed in the IS/MND Transportation section. The IS/MND describes that the proposed project would generate an additional 8 AM and 8 PM peak-hour trips, which would be well below the traffic impact significance threshold of 100 peak-hour AM and PM trips. Therefore, the proposed project was found to have less than significant traffic impacts. Cars traveling either eastbound or westbound on Grayson Road would have more than 500 feet of sight distance from the project driveway. This is more than adequate to provide for adequate stopping time on the 35 mph designated Grayson Road. e. Kirsten West West Comment 1 The comment notes that protections are in place through zoning and other County protections. However, the comment requests clarification regarding why some of these protections are being waived. The comment letter includes multiple other questions regarding why the project does not conform to County standards including, density, R-15 development standards, and frontage improvement requirements. The State Legislature passed the State Density Bonus Law to require cities and counties to grant a density bonus and other incentives or concessions to housing development projects in which affordable housing is provided. Consistent with State law, the proposed project’s inclusion of one moderate-income housing unit would allow for a 7 percent increase in density. Development on the project site at this density would be physically precluded by the minimum lot size, lot width, depth, retaining wall setbacks, and front and side yard setbacks for the R-15 zoning ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 49 designation. As such, these standards would be waived for the proposed project in accordance with State law. It is important to note that the Density Bonus Law establishes mandatory requirements for the County and is entirely separate from CEQA. Under the Density Bonus Law, the County is precluded from applying any development standard that would prevent construction of the project unless the County can make specific public health and safety findings. West Comment 2 The commenter asks why code-protected trees are being removed. Project design includes the avoidance of approximately 30 percent of the on-site trees, all other trees will be removed and replaced. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodland in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non- native trees, to be replaced with native trees. This is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice. West Comment 3 The comment notes that the proposed driveway length would cause vehicles to be parked along Grayson Road. The comment states that the proposed project’s 14 - foot setback allowance should not include the garage, and that a minimum 20 -foot driveway should be included for each proposed lot to prevent parking on Grayson Road, which could potentially cause pedestrian and cyclist safety issues. As discussed in the response to Haberman’s comments, the proposed project would enforce a 20-foot minimum front yard setback requirement to the face of the two-car garages in each proposed unit. This would exceed the standard parking stall length of 19 feet, and would thus allow for parking of standard-sized vehicles on the driveways. The proposed frontage improvements are expected to provide adequate pedestrian and cyclist travel facilities along the project frontage. West Comment 3 The comment is concerned with the stated active hours for noise-generating activities on the project site. The comment requests a limit of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for on-site noise-generating activities on Saturday, and a weekday limitation on noise-generating activities from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The comment notes that prior projects in the County have had these restrictions. ZA – October 2, 2023 CDSD20-09531 Page 50 As discussed previously, the project would be required to abide by standard hours of construction as a condition of approval. IX.CONCLUSION Staff recommends the Zoning Administrator approve County File #CDSD20-09531, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Attachments: •Findings and Conditions of Approval •Maps •Environmental Review (Comment, IS/MND, MMRP) •Plans FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09531: ANDY BYDE, CALIBR VENTURES (APPLICANT) GRAYSON ROAD LLC (OWNER) FINDINGS I. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffic: Traffic engineers and planners use the concepts of Level of Service (LOS) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) to qualitatively describe traffic conditions. Additionally, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Growth Management Plan, the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Action Plan, and the County of Contra Costa (County) General Plan establish measures of effectiveness and requirements for the analysis and disclosure of circulation impacts associated with new land developments. Potential circulation impacts may be expected, and traffic impact analyses are required for projects that generate more than 100 net new peak-hour trips. A project generating less than 100 peak-hour trips generally will not create or exacerbate any current traffic patterns. Using standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation trip rates, the eight additional housing unit project will generate eight AM and eight PM gross peak-hour trips. At this expected rate, the cumulative effect to local roadways is negligible. Senate Bill (SB) 743 established a change in the metric to be applied for determining traffic impacts associated with development projects. Rather than the delay-based criteria associated with a Level of Service (LOS) analysis, the increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) associated with a project is now the basis for determining impacts. Contra Costa County adopted the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, which includes a VMT policy on June 23, 2020. Pursuant to the County guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and do not require a project specific traffic impact analysis. The project proposes eight additional residential units which is under the County guidelines VMT screening criteria threshold. Therefore, the impacts from the project are expected to be inconsequential. 1. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water quantity can be provided. The subject property is within the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) service area. In an agency comment letter for the project, EBMUD stated that water service for the project could be accommodated. Thus, adequate water quantity is available to the project. 2. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires that new development demonstrate that adequate sanitary sewer service is available. The subject property is within the H. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) service area. In an agency comment letter received from CCCSD, the district stated sanitary sewer service is available for the project and that the proposed project would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity. 3. Fire Protection: The fire protection standards under the GMP require that a fire station be within one and one-half miles of development in urban, suburban and central business CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 2 of 30 district areas, or requires that automatic fire sprinkler systems be installed to satisfy this standard. The project site is within the Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District jurisdiction, and the project requires the Fire District’s review and approval prior to building permits being issued to ensure compliance with all fire codes and regulations. Compliance with all requirements suggests that the project will satisfy the GMP fire protection standards. CCCFPD, has 36 stations serving the County, including two stations within two miles of the project site. The nearest station to the project site is Station 5 at 205 Boyd Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.72 miles from the project site. Thus, sprinklers would be required for the residences on the property. 4. Public Protection: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions of approval will requires that prior to the recording of the parcel map, the owner of the property shall participate in establishing a special tax for the parcel created by this subdivision. The collected tax money will be used to augment existing police services to accommodate for the incremental increase in population as a result of this subdivision project. 5. Parks and Recreation: As the project will add to the County’s population, the conditions fo approval will requires the project proponent to pay applicable Park Impact in-lieu fees for the new residences. These fees, in conjunction with all other Park Dedication fees collected for development within the County, will be used in part to purchase new park land and upgrade existing community parks as determined appropriate by the Board of Supervisors. 6. Flood Control and Drainage: The project is required to meet collect and convey requirements of the County Subdivision Ordinance Title 9, by constructing the necessary drainage improvements, or obtaining necessary exceptions to the code. The applicant must also comply with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, Title 10, for stormwater treatment. The new drainage improvements will both meet stormwater discharge requirements for stormwater treatment, while also accommodating all rainwater runoff generated by the project, as required by Title 9. Exemptions to allow private maintenance of drainage facilities is appropriate given the necessity of onsite detention. II. Tentative Map Findings 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general plan required by law. Project Finding: The proposed project will conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. The project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 3 of 30 that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. Each of the following factors has also been evaluated and found to be consistent: the extent to which the project is consistent with General Plan policies pertaining to compatibility of land uses; compliance with principles of the Urban Limit Line and Measure C-1990, protection of open spaces; and protection of water quality; and found no evidence of inconsistencies. Additionally, the projected related traffic is not anticipated to negatively affect local traffic patterns or significantly diminish the Level of Service of key intersections in the area or exceed VMT thresholds. The tentative parcel map for this subdivision is consistent with the applicable goals and policies as found in the County 2005-2020 General Plan. Therefore, based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the tentative map is consistent with the County General Plan. 2. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. Project Finding: As required by the conditions of approval, the project does not pose any significant traffic impacts and must comply with the “collect and convey” requirements and design standards for construction of public roads. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant is required to contribute fees for parks and recreation, school districts, child care and police services. Payment of these fees along with compliance with the applicable California Building Code will fulfill all obligations related to construction of the project. Therefore, based on the proposal, no physical circumstances would restrict the developer from completing the project. III. Tree Permit Findings Required Finding: The Zoning Administrator is satisfied that necessary factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree permit have been satisfied. Project Finding: An Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, identified 117 code-protected trees in the project work area. The report recommended removal of 97 trees to accommodate the proposed development and called for the protection of 17 trees with work within their dripline. The Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance states that the director of the department may attach conditions to ensure compliance with the chapter and code. These conditions may include a requirement to replace any or all trees on a comparable ratio of either size or quantity. To meet this requirement the applicant would be required to submit and implement a landscaping and irrigation plan that includes replacement of the trees that have been removed. Trees planted will be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits and will be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, or the maximum that can be practicably accommodated on the site. IV. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 4 of 30 In accordance with the state Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an initial study was prepared to determine the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development project. The initial study identified potential impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon completion of the Initial Study, it was determined that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project description that would reduce these project impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as recommended conditions of approval. The Initial Study, Notice of Public Review, and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were first posted with the County Recorder and circulated for public and agency review on April 22, 2022. In response to extensive comments from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the applicant revised the project and updated multiple studies, including the Biological Resources Analysis and associated mitigation measures. The revised MND was then prepared and circulated for public and agency review on March 24, 2023. The final day for providing comments on the adequacy of the Initial Study was April 24, 2023. Two agency comments were received during the comment period: California Department of Fish Wildlife and EBMUD. Additionally, seven comment letters were received from individuals. No additional impacts were identified in these comments and all comments are summarized and responded to in the project staff report. Notice of the proposed project was sent to Native American tribes, as applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1. A Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission, dated October 28, 2015, was used to identify tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. No requests for consultation were received. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD20-09531 1. Approval of the Vesting Tentative Map for a 10 Residential-Lot Subdivision; is generally based on the following documents: • Application and materials received on January 13, 2020; • Revised Project Description Dated March 25, 2022; • Revised Vesting Tentative Map for Subdivision CDSD20-09531, received January 28, 2022; • Architectural Plans received December 15, 2021; • Hydrology And Storm Water Detention Report prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; • Storm Water Control Plan prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering Inc., dated February 22 2022; CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 5 of 30 • Grayson Road Inclusionary Housing Plan submitted September 18, 2023; • Grayson Road Density Bonus Proposal submitted September 18, 2023; • Geotechnical Report prepared by ENGEO Incorporated dated October 4, 2019; • Archeological Survey and Historical Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Archaeological/Historical Consultants, dated February 2007; • Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020; • Biological Resource Analysis Addendum prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC., dated December 2022; 2. The concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, is approved, as shown in the Vesting Tentative Map received on January 28, 2022. 3. The waivers to development standards is Approved, as shown on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map received January 28, 2022 to allow: a. A reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; b. A reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; c. A reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and d. Reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14 -foot front setbacks to residences (20 feet to garages), and 0-foot setbacks for retaining walls 6 feet or less. 4. This permit authorizes the development of ten lots on the subject property as generally identified in the CDSD20-09531 vesting tentative map and documents referenced above. 5. A Tree Permit to allow removal of 97 code-protected trees, and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees, as shown in the Arborist Report by Traverso Tree Services, dated May 6, 2020, is Approved. Indemnification 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 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 provided 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. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 6 of 30 Application Costs 7. The Major Subdivision application was subject to an initial deposit of $7,525.00 that was paid with the application submittal, plus time and material costs if the application review expenses exceed the initial deposit. Any additional fee due must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit, or 60 days of the effective date of this permit, whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance and final file preparation. Pursuant to Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Resolution Number 2013/340, where a fee payment is over 60 days past due, the application shall be charged interest at a rate of ten percent (10%) from the date of approval. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. Compliance Report Prior to Filing the Parcel Map 8. At least 45 days prior to filing of the Parcel Map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide a permit compliance report to the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) for review and approval. The report shall identify all conditions of approval that are administered by the CDD. The report shall document the measures taken by the applicant to satisfy all relevant conditions. Copies of the permit conditions may be obtained from the CDD. Unless otherwise indicated, the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the applicable conditions of this report prior to filing the Final Map. The permit compliance review is subject to staff time and materials charges, with an initial deposit of $2,000 which shall be paid at the time of submittal of the compliance report. Fencing 9. Prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, a fencing plan program shall be submitted to CDD for the review and approval. The approved program shall be attached to the CC&Rs. CC&Rs 10. Prior to recording the Final Map, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall be submitted to CDD for review and approval. This document shall include the maintenance obligation requirements of Public Works condition(s) of approval. Park Dedication Fees 11. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence , the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of Community Development Division (CDD) that all Park Dedication fees have been paid for the subdivision. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 7 of 30 Child Care Fees 12. Prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit for a new residence , the project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of CDD that all child care facility fees have been paid for the subdivision. Police Services Fees 13. Election for Establishment of a Police Services District to Augment Police Services: Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, 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 per parcel annual amount (with appropriate future CPI adjustment) established at the time of voting by the Board of Supervisors. The election to provide for the tax shall be completed prior to filing the Final Map. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of holding the election, payable at the time the election is requested by the owner. Allow a minimum of three to four months for processing. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance 14. The applicant shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, the project proponent shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. Aesthetics 15. Thirty days prior to applying for a building permit for new residence, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: • All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the subject property or road. • Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the subject property. (Mitigation Monitoring (MM) Aesthetics 1) Air Quality 16. The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during the project and shall be included on all construction plans: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 8 of 30 • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material to and from the site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations (MM Air Quality 1) Biological Resources 17. If it is determined that additional native trees can be protected in place while still achieving project objectives (as determined by the project Arborist in coordination with the Construction Manager and the project proponent), the project proponent will determine if additional trees can be saved based upon the potential impacts from the grading to the root structure of the trees by “field-fit” grading activities to the greatest extent practicable to conduct such avoidance. 18. In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. (MM Biology 1) 19. All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non- native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 9 of 30 California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 2) Trees shall be planted prior to requesting a final inspection on the residential building permit for each lot. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to removal of trees or prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a security that is acceptable to the CDD. The bond shall include the amount of the approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security: The County ordinance requires that the applicant pay fees to cover all staff time and material costs of staff for processing the landscape improvement security. At the time of submittal of the security, the applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $200. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree(s) intended to be protected has been damaged, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. 20. Prior to recordation of a final map, a Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of CDD. The Final Landscaping Plan shall include the tree restitution required by CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 10 of 30 Mitigation Measure Biology 2, and be consistent shall conform to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County’s Ordinance, if one is adopted. Prior to final building inspection, a completed WELO Part II – Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to CDD staff for review and approval. All landscaping shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, landscaping plans shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. 21. If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. (MM Biology 3) 22. A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. (MM Biology 4) 23. Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 11 of 30 In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red-legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. (MM Biology 5) 24. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. (MM Biology 6) 25. Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. (MM Biology 7) 26. For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special- status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special -status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: a. To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 12 of 30 b. Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. c. If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artificial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. (MM Biology 8) 27. During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 13 of 30 Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. f. All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wpcontent- /uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf Cultural Resources 28. All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. (MM Cultural Resources 1) 29. In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: a. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines th e remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 14 of 30 responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. b. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. (MM Cultural Resources 1) Geotechnical Report 30. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. (MM Geology 1) 31. The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. (MM Geology 2) CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 15 of 30 Noise 32. To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: a. The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. b. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. c. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. d. At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. e. The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. (MM Noise 1) Construction Restrictions and Requirements 33. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the project, the project developer or contractor shall mail a notice to each adjacent residential property providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. 34. The applicant shall comply with the following restrictions and requirements, which shall be stated on the face of the construction drawings: A. Unless approved otherwise via prior authorization from the Zoning Administrator for special circumstances, construction activities are limited to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and are prohibited on the calendar dates that the following state and federal holidays are observed: New Year’s Day (State and Federal) Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. (State and Federal) Washington’s Birthday (Federal) Lincoln’s Birthday (State) Presidents’ Day (State and Federal) Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day (State and Federal) Juneteenth National Independence Day (Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 16 of 30 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 details on the actual date the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal holidays: http://www.opm.gov/fedhol California holidays: http://www.edd.ca.gov/payroll_taxes/State_Holidays.htm B. Transport of heavy equipment and trucks is limited to weekdays between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M., and is prohibited on weekends and the aforementioned state and federal holidays. C. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to adjacent properties. This shall be communicated to project-related contractors. D. Construction equipment and materials shall be stored onsite to the maximum extent practicable. E. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site. F. Any debris found outside the site shall immediately be collected and deposited in appropriate receptacles. G. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers that are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences as possible. Contingency Restitution Should Altered Trees Be Damaged 35. Trees to be Preserved but Altered – Pursuant to the conclusions of the arborist report, proposed improvements within the root zone of trees noted on the site plan to be preserved have been determined to be feasible and still allow for preservation provided that the recommendations of the arborist are followed. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 816- 6.1204 of the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, to address the possibility that construction activity nevertheless damages these trees, the applicant shall provide the County with a security (e.g. bond, cash deposit) to be submitted prior to CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of a building permit (e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 17 of 30 whichever occurs first, to allow for replacement of trees intended to be preserved that are significantly damaged by construction activity. The security shall be based on: A. Extent of Possible Restitution Improvements – The planting of 17, 15-gallon trees, which shall include California native species. in the vicinity of the affected trees, or equivalent planting contribution, and subject to prior review and approval of CDD. B. Determination of Security Amount: The security shall submitted for each lot and provide for all of the following costs: i. Preparation of landscape/irrigation plan by a licensed landscape architect or arborist, which shall comply with the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or the County Ordinance, if one is adopted; ii. Labor and materials estimate for planting the potential number of trees and related irrigation improvements that may be required, prepared by a licensed landscape contractor; and iii. An additional 20% of the total of the above amounts to address inflation costs. C. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security – The County Ordinance requires that the applicant cover all time and material costs of staff for processing a tree protection security. The Applicant shall pay an initial fee deposit of $200 at time of submittal of a security. D. Duration of Security: The security for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months beyond the date of receipt of the security and from the time, the final inspection for the lot was approved. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree intended to be protected has been damaged by development activity, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution of the damaged trees, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. Debris Recovery 36. At least 15 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit the developer shall submit Construction Waste Management Plan, which identifies approved methods to comply with CalGreen requirement to recycle and/or salvage for reuse construction and demolition waste materials generated at the jobsite. Prior to Final Inspection, developer shall submit Final Report containing information and supporting documentation of the above-mentioned requirement. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 18 of 30 Steet Names 37. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, proposed name(s) shall be submitted for review by the Department of Conservation and Development, GIS/Mapping Section. Alternate street names should be submitted. The Final Map cannot be certified by CDD without the approved street names. Will Serve Letters 38. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will -serve letter from East Bay Municipal Utility District shall be submitted to CDD. 39. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from Central Contra Costa Sanitary District shall be submitted to CDD. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT (HCI) DIVISION, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21- 09581 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 40. This project is subject to County Ordinance Code, Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Terms and definitions regarding the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance are pursuant to this chapter. Pursuant to Section 822-4.402(b) of the County Ordinance Code, a residential development of five or more for-sale units shall require at least fifteen percent of the for-sale units to be developed and sold as affordable units. At least twenty percent of the inclusionary units shall be sold at an affordable price to lower-income households. The remaining units shall be sold to moderate-income families at an affordable price. For-Sale Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee 41. The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 1.35 affordable units (9 total base units x 0.15 of total = 1.35 units) for the project. The Applicant has submitted an Inclusionary Housing Plan dated March 25, 2022, and proposes constructing one for-sale moderate income inclusionary unit (affordable to households making up to 120% Area Median Income) on Lot 1 of the property. The unit on Lot 1 is an approximately 3,097 square-foot single-family detached home consisting of four bedrooms. The one moderate-income unit proposed for compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements is the same moderate-income unit required for compliance with the Density Bonus request. This unit may be referenced as inclusionary unit, density bonus unit, or both in these conditions. The requirements for the one moderate-income unit must comply with both the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and State Density Bonus law, and the most restrictive requirements would apply. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 19 of 30 The Applicant has proposed to pay a partial in-lieu fee for the fractional 0.35 inclusionary unit, and the County has accepted this proposal. The current calculation of the partial in-lieu fee for the fractional inclusionary unit is $15,444.00. The final calculation of the in-lieu fee will be calculated upon payment. This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferable. A partial in- lieu fee of $15,444.00 will be paid for the fractional .35 unit (.35 = 26% of the fee total of $59,401. 26% of this fee = $15,444.00) Density Bonus Request 42. The Applicant submitted a revised project description which included a density bonus request dated March 25, 2022, which proposed constructing ten percent of the total dwelling units of a housing development where all the units are offered to the public for purchase. The Applicant proposed constructing one moderate-income unit, constituting twelve percent of the total for-sale units in the development. Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant may request one project concession or incentive for providing twelve percent (one unit) for moderate-income units of the total units within the for-sale housing development. The applicant requested the concession to not have to complete frontage improvements. The County accepted the Applicant’s request to not complete frontage improvements. To fully improve the property frontage would result in significant costs that could preclude the construction of the development at its proposed density including the moderate unit. Density Bonus – Reduction in Development Standards Pursuant to Government Code 65915(e), the Applicant proposed a waiver or reduction of the following development standards: • Lot Area – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 15,000 square feet, proposed lot sizes ranges from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. • Lot Width – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 100 feet, the proposed average lot widths range from 56.43 to 99.01 feet. • Lot Depth – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum of 120 feet in depth, the proposed lot depths range from 87.45 to 331 feet. The lot depths for all proposed lots, except Lot 1 comply with the minimum requirements as proposed. • Retaining Wall Structure Setbacks – where the County Ordinance Code considers all retaining walls over three feet as a structure that must meet all setback requirements, the proposed retaining wall setbacks is 0 feet on all lots. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 20 of 30 Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement 43. At least 90 days before the recordation of the Parcel Map or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first, the Applicant shall execute an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant to Chapter 822-4 Inclusionary Housing, Chapter 822-2 Density Bonus, and Government Code 95915 to ensure that the property will be deed restricted for one unit to be affordable and sold to a moderate income household. This 90-day period allows for the preparation, County approval, and recordation of the Agreement prior to the milestones referenced above. To initiate the County to prepare and execute an Agreement, the Applicant must file a condition of approval compliance review application accompanied by the appropriate fees, documents, and exhibits listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist and/or Density Bonus Plan Checklist. The Agreement must be submitted to the Board of Supervisors before execution by all parties and recordation. The Agreement will establish the process for determining the unit’s maximum affordable sales price, buyer eligibility, and additional program details as referenced in Chapter 822 -4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and Government Code 65915. A detailed timeline for the project, including the project’s construction, marketing, the Applicant accepting and reviewing applications from qualified households, and the sale of the inclusionary unit. General 44. The following are general terms for granting a density bonus and compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. a. The Applicant hereby represents warrants and covenants that will cause the Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County, California, and other places the County may reasonably request. The Applicant shall pay fees incurred with any such recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the document by the County and before the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first. b. The one inclusionary unit in the project shall be available for sale to members of the general public who are income eligible. The Applicant shall not give preference to any particular class or group of persons in selling the units, except that the units must be sold to a household with income no higher than 120% of the Area Median Income for Contra Costa County as adjusted for family size as defined in Section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code. There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), age (except for CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 21 of 30 lawful senior housing), ancestry, or disability, in the sale of the unit in the project nor shall the Applicant or any person claiming under or through the Applicant, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation concerning the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of homeowners of any unit in connection with employment of persons for construction of the project. c. The County will provide the Applicant with income certification forms to be completed by the potential homebuyers. The income levels of all moderate-income household applicants for the inclusionary/density bonus unit shall be pre-certified by the Applicant (or subsequent holder of the Agreement(s)) prior to submittal to the County for review and approval. d. Upon violating any of the Agreement’s provisions by the Applicant, the County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the breach. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a reasonable period, not longer than thirty (30) days after the date the notice is deemed received, or within such further time as the County determines is necessary to correct the violation, the County may declare a default under the Agreement. Upon declaration of a default or if the County determines that the Applicant has made any misrepresentation in connection with receiving any benefits under this Agreement, the County may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for such relief at law or in equity as may be appropriate. Terms of Affordability 45. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted so that if the home is sold within forty-five (45) years, it must be sold at an affordable sales price to a moderate-income household. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted upon sale to ensure the continued affordability of this unit for the required term of affordability in accordance with Government Code 65915. a. Affordable Sales Price – means a sales price at which a moderate-income household can qualify for the purchase of target units, taking into account available financing, number of bedrooms and therefore, assumed household size, reasonable down payment, and affordable housing costs as defined in Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5. The affordable sales price for moderate income households must not exceed a price affordable to a persons and families whose income is at or below one hundred ten percent AMI. Development Standards 46. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and finished in compliance with the approved Inclusionary Housing Plan. The unit is subject to the standards of Section 822.4.412 of the County Ordinance. a. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and occupied before or concurrently with the market rate units within the same residential development. A hold will be placed on the final inspection/occupancy for all building permits issued within the subdivision to ensure that the inclusionary/density bonus unit meets this requirement. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 22 of 30 b. The average number of bedrooms for the inclusionary unit must be equivalent to the average number of bedrooms for market-rate units within the same residential development. Marketing and Homebuyer Selection 47. It is anticipated that the Applicant will construct all project units and market them before construction completion. The Applicant shall submit documentation and other information to the County for review and approval at least 90 days prior to construction completion and prior to the Applicant’s request for a final building inspection and final occupancy of the building. The documentation and information required for review and approval are listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist or Density Bonus Plan Checklist and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Marketing Plan b. Homebuyer Selection Plan. The homebuyer selection plan should include a provision for a lottery process for the inclusionary/density bonus unit. c. Marketing Materials, including translated Marketing Materials in Spanish and Chinese. In addition to other marketing efforts proposed by the Applicant in the marketing plan, the inclusionary unit shall be marketed through local, non-profit, social service, faith- based, and other organizations with potential buyers as clients or constituents. Marketing materials shall be made available online for at least one month before the first sale and shared with County Housing staff to promote to its mailing lists. The Applicant shall translate marketing materials, and the marketing plan shall be submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development before marketing the inclusionary housing unit. Marketing may also include publicity through local television and radio stations as well as local newspapers, including the Contra Costa Times, Classified Flea Market, El Mensajero, La Opinion, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily. 48. The developer shall refer all qualified homebuyers to a HUD Homebuyer Counselor prior to the sale of the inclusionary unit. For-Sale Inclusionary/Density Bonus Unit Restrictions 49. The initial sale of a for-sale inclusionary unit shall occur only to a household that meets the following criteria: a. The household has not owned a residence within the previous three years; and CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 23 of 30 b. The household has no more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars in assets. The amount excludes assets reserved for a down payment and closing costs, assets in retirement savings accounts, and medical savings accounts. c. The purchaser of the for-sale inclusionary/density bonus unit must agree to occupy the dwelling unit as their principal residence. d. The term of affordability for the inclusionary/density bonus unit is 45 years. The for-sale inclusionary unit may be resold after the initial sale to a moderate -income purchaser at a moderate-income sales price. If a moderate-income purchaser cannot be found after diligently marketing the unit widely and after a period determined by DCD, the unit may be sold to an above -moderate- income purchaser at a market price, provided that the sale results in a recapture by t he County of financial interest in the unit equal to the sum of: The difference between the initial affordable sales price and the appraised market value of the unit at the time of the initial sale; and The County’s proportionate share of any appreciation since the time of the initial sale. Appreciation is the difference between the resale price to the above-moderate-income purchaser and the appraised market value at the initial sale. The County’s proportionate share of appreciation is equal to the percentage by which the initial affordable sales price was less than the appraised market value at the time of the initial sale. Prequalification of Homebuyers and Compliance Review 50. The Applicant is responsible for marketing and prequalifying potential homebuyers for income qualification. The Applicant shall submit for DCD’s review and prequalification prior to the initial sale of the inclusionary/density bonus unit, and the Applicant shall submit to the Department of Conservation and Development for review and approval, all forms, and documentation demonstrating that the buyer of the unit is qualified as a moderate -income household. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection/ occupancy of all building permits associated with the construction of the residences in the project until documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of Conservation and Development. To initiate this prequalification review, the applicant must file a COA Compliance Review Application if there is no open compliance review application for this project. 51. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and Development informed of the contact information of the owner or designee responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be contacted (i.e., mailing addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers) at all times. a. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 24 of 30 development, whichever comes first, and with filing a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the name of the contact representing the property owner for permit compliance and their contact information. b. Should the contact subsequently change (e.g., new designee or owner), within 30 days of the change, the Applicant shall issue a letter to the Department of Conservation and Development with the name of the new party who has been assigned permit compliance responsibility and their contact information. Failure to satisfy this condition may result in the commencement of procedures to revoke the permit. PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION CDSD20-09531 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9, and Title 10 of the Ordinance Code. Any exception(s) must be stipulated in these Conditions of Approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the tentative map submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development on January 28, 2022. COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO FILING OF THE PARCEL MAP. General Requirements 52. 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 vesting tentative map received by the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division, on January 28, 2022. 53. Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted, if necessary, to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, along with review and inspection fees, and secu¬rity for all improvements required by the Ordinance Code for the conditions of approval of this subdivision. Any necessary traffic signing and stripping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division of the Public Works Department and the City of Pleasant Hill as applicable. Roadway Improvements (Grayson Road) 54. The Applicant shall construct frontage improvements along Grayson Road in accordance with the recommendations of the City of Pleasant Hill. The applicant will need to demonstrate that the City of Pleasant Hill approves of the frontage improvements proposed under this project. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 25 of 30 Access to Adjoining Property 55. The Applicant shall furnish proof to the Public Works Department 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. 56. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Pleasant Hill for construction within the limits of the City of Pleasant Hill. 57. The Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved site/development plan. Abutters Rights 58. Applicant shall relinquish abutter’s rights of access along Grayson Road with the exception of the proposed private road intersection. Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance: 59. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the private road intersection with Grayson Road for a design speed of 45 miles per hour. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide sight distance at these driveways. Any new landscaping, signs, fencing, retaining walls, or other obstructions proposed at the driveways shall be setback to ensure that the sight lines are clear. Private Road 60. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system to current County private road standards with a minimum pavement width of 28 feet, with 4.5-foot sidewalk (measured from the face of curb) within a minimum 42-foot access easement. 61. The Applicant shall construct the on-site roadways and the internal road network (serving the residential development) to current County private road standards. Although the proposed on-site roadways are shown as private, the pavement structural section shall conform to County public road standards. 62. Per the Vesting Tentative Map, applicant shall construct a paved turnaround at the end of the proposed private road subject to the review of the Fire District. Street Lights: 63. Property owner(s) shall annex to the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2010-1 formed for Countywide Street Light Financing. Annexation into a street light service area does not include the transfer of ownership and maintenance of street lighting on private roads. Bicycle - Pedestrian Facilities: 64. The Applicant shall design all public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance with Title 24 (for Accessibility) and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This shall include all sidewalks, paths, driveway depressions, and curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 26 of 30 curb returns to accommodate the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4 -foot landing on top of any curb ramp proposed. Parking 65. Parking shall be prohibited on one side of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 36 feet and on both sides of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 28 feet. “No Parking” signs shall be installed along these portions of the roads subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department. Utilities/Undergrounding 66. The Applicant shall underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities, including those along the frontage of Grayson Road. Applicant shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground electrical, gas, telephone, cable television and communication conduits and cables including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. The composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans shall be signed by a licensed civil engineer. Drainage Improvements: 67. 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 system which conveys the stormwater to a natural watercourse, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. Applicant shall verify the adequacy at any downstream drainage facility accepting stormwater from this project prior to discharging runoff. If the downstream system(s) is inadequate to handle the existing and project condition for the required design storm event, applicant shall construct improvements to make the system adequate. Applicant shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. 68. The nearest public drainage facility is an existing storm drain located on Grayson Road. Applicant shall verify its adequacy prior to discharging run off. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 69. Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards. 70. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner. Floodplain Management: 71. A portion of the project property lies within a Special Flood Hazard Area (100 year flood boundary) as designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 27 of 30 Rate Maps. The applicant shall be aware of and comply with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (Federal) and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance as they pertain to development and future construction of any structures on this property. Creek Banks and Creek Structure Setbacks: 72. The Property owner shall relinquish "development rights" over that portion of the site that is within the structure setback area of Grayson Creek. The structure setback area shall be determined by using the criteria outlined in Chapter 914 14, "Rights of Way and Setbacks," of the Subdivision Ordinance. "Development rights" shall be conveyed to the County by grant deed. 73. The property owner shall be aware that the creek banks on the site are potentially unstable. The property owner shall execute a recordable agreement with the County which states that the developer and the property owner and the future property owner(s) will hold harmless Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District in the event of damage to the on-site and off-site improvements as a result of creek- bank failure or erosion. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): 74. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (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. Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMPs) for the reduction or elimination of stormwater pollutants. The project design shall incorporate, wherever feasible, the following long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program for the site's stormwater drainage. - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Install approved full trash capture devices on all catch basins (excluding catch basins within bioretention basins) as reviewed and approved by Public Works Department. Trash capture devices shall meet the requirements of the County’s NPDES Permit. - Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain markers. - Construct concrete driveway weakened plane joints at angles to assist in directing run-off to landscaped/pervious areas prior to entering the street curb and gutter. - Distribute public information items regarding the Clean Water Program and lot specific IMPs to buyers. - Other alternatives comparable to the above as approved by Public Works. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 28 of 30 Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance 75. The applicant shall submit a final Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) and a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance Plan (O+M Plan) to the Public Works Department, which shall be reviewed for compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and shall be deemed consistent with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) prior to filing of the Final Map. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant. 76. Improvement plans shall be reviewed to verify consistency with the final SWCP and compliance with Provision C.3 of the County’s NPDES Permit and the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014). 77. Stormwater management facilities shall be subject to inspection by the Public Works Department; all time and materials costs for inspection of stormwater management facilities shall be borne by the applicant. 78. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall enter into a Stormwater Management Facility Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County, in which the property owner(s) shall accept responsibility for and related to the operat ion and maintenance of the stormwater facilities, and grant access to relevant public agencies for inspection of stormwater management facilities. 79. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall annex the subject property into Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities), which funds responsibilities of Contra Costa County under its NPDES Permit to oversee the ongoing operation and maintenance of stormwater facilities by property owners. 80. Any proposed water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer than 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. Drainage Area Fee Ordinance: 81. The Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 62 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors prior to initiation of the use requested with this application. This fee shall be paid prior to filing of the Final Map. CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 29 of 30 ADVISORY NOTES ADVISORY NOTES ARE NOT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; THEY ARE PROVIDED TO ALERT THE APPLICANT TO ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES, STATUTES, AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT. A. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, ASSESSMENTS, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations or exactions required as part of this project approval. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant to Govern ment Code Section 66020 and must be delivered to the Community Development Division within a 90 - day period that begins on the date that this project is approved. If the 90th day falls on a day that the Community Development Division is closed, then the protest must be submitted by the end of the next business day. B. Applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Central Contra Costa Areas of Benefit, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Payment is required prior to issuance of a building permit. C. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and Wildlife of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Wildlife Code. D. 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. E. Further development of the parcel may need to comply with the latest Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. This compliance may require a Stormwater Control Plan and an Operations and Maintenance Plan prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. Compliance may also require annexation of the subject property into the Community Facilities District 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities) and entering into a standard Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County. F. This project is subject to the development fees in effect under County Ordinance as December 17, 2020, the date the vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Department of Conservation and Development. These fees are in addition to any other development fees, which may specified in the conditions of approval. G. Additional requirements may be imposed by the following agencies and departments: CDSD20-09531 Findings & COA Page 30 of 30 • Public Works Department • Building Inspection Division • Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District • Health Services Department • Central Contra Costa Sanitary District • East Bay Municipal Utility District The Applicant is strongly encouraged to review these agencies’ requirements prior to continuing with the project. Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. SL General Plan Building Outlines Highways Highways Bay Area Streets General Plan SV (Single Family Residential - Very Low) SL (Single Family Residential - Low) SM (Single Family Residential - Medium) SH (Single Family Residential - High) ML (Multiple Family Residential - Low) MM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium) MH (Multiple Family Residential - High) MV (Multiple Family Residential - Very High) MS (Multiple Family Residential - Very High Special) CC (Congregate Care/Senior Housing) MO (Mobile Home) M-1 (Parker Avenue Mixed Use) M-2 (Downtown/Waterfront Rodeo Mixed Use) M-3 (Pleasant Hill BART Mixed Use) M-4 (Willow Pass Road Mixed Use) M-5 (Willow Pass Road Commercial Mixed Use) M-6 (Bay Point Residential Mixed Use) M-7 (Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Mixed Use) M-8 (Dougherty Valley Village Center Mixed Use) M-9 (Montalvin Manor Mixed Use) M-10 (Willow Pass Business Park Mixed Use) M-11 (Appian Way Mixed Use) M-12 (Triangle Area Mixed Use) M-13 (San Pablo Dam Road Mixed Use) M-14 (Heritage Mixed Use) CO (Commercial) OF (Office) BP (Business Park) LI (Light Industry) HI (Heavy Industry) AL, OIBA (Agricultural Lands & Off Island Bonus Area) CR (Commercial Recreation) ACO (Airport Commercial) LF (Landfill) PS (Public/Semi-Public) PR (Parks and Recreation) OS (Open Space) AL (Agricultural Lands) AC (Agricultural Core) DR (Delta Recreation) Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. R-15 Zoning Building Outlines Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Zoning R-6 (Single Family Residential) R-6, -FH -UE (Flood Hazard and Animal Exclusion) R-6 -SD-1 (Slope Density Hillside Development) R-6 -TOV -K (Tree Obstruction and Kensington) R-6, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-6 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) R-7 (Single Family Residential) R-7 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) R-10 (Single Family Residential) R-10, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-12 (Single Family Residential) R-15 (Single Family Residential) R-20 (Single Family Residential) R-20, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-40 (Single Family Residential) R-40, -FH -UE (Flood Hazard and Animal Exclusion) R-40, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-65 (Single Family Residential) R-100 (Single Family Residential) D-1 (Two Family Residential) D-1 -T (Transitional Combining District) D-1, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) M-12 (Multiple Family Residential) M-12 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) M-17 (Multiple Family Residential) M-29 (Multiple Family Residential) F-R (Forestry Recreational) F-R -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) F-1 (Water Recreational) F-1 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) A-2 (General Agriculture) A-2, -BS (Boat Storage Combining District) A-2, -BS -SG (Boat Storage and Solar Energy Generation) A-2 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) A-2, -FH -SG (Flood Hazard and Solar Energy Generation) A-2 -SD-1 (Slope Density Hillside Development) A-2, -SG (Solar Energy Generation Combining District) A-2 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) A-3 (Heavy Agriculture) A-3 -BS (Boat Storage Combining District) Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Aerial Building Outlines Maintained Roads City Limits Unincorporated Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Maintained Roads Board of Supervisors' Districts Water Bodies County Boundary Bay Area Counties Assessment Parcels Aerials 2019 Red: Band_1 Green: Band_2 Blue: Band_3 World Imagery Low Resolution 15m Imagery High Resolution 60cm Imagery High Resolution 30cm Imagery Citations Page 1 Contra Costa County March 24, 2023 NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Revised) County File No. CDSD20-09531 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 Division of the Department of Conservation and Development of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: PROJECT NAME: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision (County File #CDSD20-09531) LOCATION: The property is located at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 APPLICANT: Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde, 1908 Cambridge Place, Walnut Creek, CA 94598 LEAD AGENCY: Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development (925)655-2872 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 DESCRIPTION: Project Description: The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021-square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code- protected trees. John Kopchik Director Aruna Bhat Deputy Director Deidra Dingman Deputy Director Jason Crapo Deputy Director Maureen Toms Deputy Director Gabriel Lemus Assistant Deptuty Director Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Phone: 1-855-323-2626 Page 2 The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit. In addition to the increased density of one unit (10 units total), the project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow for alternative roadway improvements along Grayson Road, including bicycle lane striping, where curb, 5-foot-wide sidewalk, necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage are required. Site and Area Description: The 3.05-gross-acre project site is located on the south side of Grayson Road, opposite the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The roughly L-shaped project site is comprised of two parcels: a northern parcel that fronts on Grayson Road, and a southern parcel that is bound by Grayson Creek to the south and east. Grayson Creek runs roughly east- west along the southern boundary of the project site, then takes a northward bend forming the east boundary. Other private properties with single-family residences abut the property to the north and west. The immediate surrounding area is representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County. Properties along Grayson Road are predominantly developed with single-family residences. Within a half-mile radius, developed parcels range in size from 4,000 square feet to 68,700 square feet, with a median size of approximately 13,000 square feet. The larger vicinity includes a mix of neighborhood-residential uses including single-family residences, churches, schools, and parks. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: The initial study for the proposed project identified potentially significant impacts in the environmental areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Environmental analysis determined that measures were available to mitigate potential adverse impacts to insignificant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c), 21063.5, and Article 6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15071) the MND describes the proposed project; identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the potential significant environmental impacts, which may result from the proposed project; and identifies measures to mitigate adverse environmental impacts. The mitigations identified in this document and designed for the proposed project, will ensure that the project will not cause a significant impact on the environment. A copy of the mitigated negative declaration and all documents referenced in the mitigated negative declaration may be reviewed on the Department of Conservation and Development webpage at the following address: Page 3 https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/4841/CEQA-Notifications Public Comment Period - The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental documents extends to Monday, April 24, 2023, at 5:00 P.M. Following the close of the public comment period, the County will consider adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to consideration of the Vesting Tentative Map. Any comments should be in writing and submitted by email to joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us or by post to the following address: Name: Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP; Project Planner; (925) 655-2872 Community Development Division Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 _________________________________ Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP Project Planner cc: County Clerk’s Office (2 copies) Adjacent Occupants and Owners Notification List Attached: Vicinity Map Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:4,514 Notes0.10.07 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Vicinity Map City Limits Unincorporated Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Maintained Roads Water Bodies County Boundary Bay Area Counties Assessment Parcels 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision (County File #CDSD20-09531) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP (925) 655-2872 joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us 4. Project Location: 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 166-030-001 and 166-030-002 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde 1908 Cambridge Place Walnut Creek, CA 94598 6. General Plan Designation: The project site is located within the Single- Family Residential – Low Density (SL) General Plan Land Use designation. 7. Zoning: The project site is located within the R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) District. 8. Description of Project: The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the 3.05 acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet. On each new lot, a 4- to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in size from approximately 2,900 to 3,500 square feet, is expected to be constructed. Two existing, vacant, residences would be demolished to accommodate the project. Implementation of the project could include more than 1,000 cubic yards of grading. Associated access, drainage, and utility facilities would be constructed throughout the site. For access, a 28-foot roadway and 4.5-foot sidewalk would connect the lots to Grayson Road. Stormwater flows would be directed to a 2,021-square-foot bioretention basin located at the northeast corner of Lot 2. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. 2 Running southwest to northwest along the southern boundary of the project site is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek. The proposed project does not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the project’s grading limits and Grayson Creek would be included as part of the project. To accommodate improvements, a tree permit would be included for the removal of 97 code-protected trees.1 The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household, therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915. By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit. In addition to the increased density of one unit (10 units total), the project is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 to allow lot average widths as low as 56 feet; (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; and (d) reduced residential setback requirement to allow 14-foot front setbacks. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. 9.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The 3.05-gross-acre project site is located on the south side of Grayson Road, opposite the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The roughly L-shaped project site is comprised of two parcels: a northern parcel that fronts on Grayson Road, and a southern parcel that is bound by Grayson Creek to the south and east. Grayson Creek runs roughly east-west along the southern boundary of the project site, then takes a northward bend forming the east boundary. Other private properties with single-family residences abut the property to the north and west. The immediate surrounding area is representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County. Properties along Grayson Road are predominantly developed with single-family residences. Within a half-mile radius, developed parcels range in size from 4,000 square feet to 68,700 square feet, with a median size of approximately 13,000 square feet. The larger vicinity includes a mix of neighborhood- residential uses including single-family residences, churches, schools, and parks. Regional access to the site is provided via I-680 by way of Gregory Lane and Taylor Boulevard and is also provided via State Route (SR) 24 by way of Pleasant Hill Road/Taylor Boulevard. Local access to the project site would be provided via Grayson Road and a new private internal street. 1 Tree #134 was authorized to be removed under an emergency tree removal by Contra Costa County on 10/28/21 3 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Contra Costa County Public Works Department, City of Pleasant Hill, Contra Costa County Fire District, Contra Costa County Local Area Formation District (LAFCO), East Bay Municipal Utility District, and Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. 11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Notice of the proposed project was sent to Native American tribes, as applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1. A Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission, dated October 28, 2015, was used to identify tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. No requests for consultation were received 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. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Services Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance Environmental 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. 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact 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. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP, Senior Planner Date Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development 03/24/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? SUMMARY: Less Than Significant a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (No Impact) Figure 9-1 of the Open Space Element of the County General Plan identifies major scenic ridges and scenic waterways in the County. According to this map, there are no designated scenic vista points in the area of the project site and therefore the project would not displace or obstruct views from a scenic vista. Furthermore, existing views of, and from the project site, would not be affected by the project because the proposed residential development would be built primarily at lower-lying elevations consistent with the existing surrounding residential neighborhood. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a state scenic highway? (No Impact) The Scenic Routes Map (Figure 5-4) of the County General Plan’s Transportation and Circulation Element identifies scenic routes in the County, including both State Scenic Highways and County designated Scenic Routes. No scenic routes are located in the project vicinity. The nearest officially designated State Scenic Highway is a portion of State Route 24, located approximately 3.41 miles south of the project site. The second closest designated State Scenic Highway is a portion of Interstate 680, which is located approximately 3.9 miles south of the project site. The project site is not visible from either State Route 24, Interstate 680, or any other more distant scenic highway. The site is surrounded by predominantly single-family residential development. The project is not located near any designated scenic highway and would not damage any scenic resources related to a scenic highway. The project would not impact trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings considered to be significant scenic resources. Thus, no impact is expected on these resources. c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality (Less than Significant Impact) The project is located in an urbanized area as designated by the U.S. Census Bureau Urban Area Reference Maps. The visual character of the site would change with the eventual development of the proposed 10 lots. However, the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan designation of Single-Family Residential – Low Density and the surrounding residential neighborhood. Though the project would include waivers from development standards for the R-15 zoning district, the residential project would be consistent with other residential development in the area, and thus the impact to the visual character of the area is expected to be less than significant. Additionally, the applicant would be required to submit a landscape plan prior to the issuance of the first building permit, ensuring adequate planting of trees and other landscaping on the site. Lastly, with approval of the requested concessions, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality and impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) Minimal glare would be introduced in the area. The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light-sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. The new sources of light associated with the proposed new 10 homes would illuminate the surrounding properties and Grayson Creek; thus, the project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light. Consequently, the applicant is required to implement the following mitigation measures to reduce impacts on nighttime views. Aesthetics 1: Thirty days prior to application for a building permit for subdivision improvements, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: 1. All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. 2. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact on nighttime views to a less than significant level. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Open Space Element. • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Transportation and Circulation Element. • U.S. Department Of Commerce, Economics & Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Census Bureau, TIGERweb., Accessed March 2023. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, March 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) 2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique 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? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique 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? (No Impact) As shown on the California Department of Conservation’s Contra Costa County Important Farmland 2016 map, the project site includes land classified as “Urban And Built-Up Land.” “Urban And Built-Up Land” is occupied by structures with a building density of at least one unit to one and one half acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel, and is not considered farmland. Thus, the proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide importance to a non-agricultural use; therefore, no impact is expected. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (No Impact) The project site is within the R-15 Single-Family Residential district and has a Single- Family Low-Density General Plan Land Use designation. No agricultural uses are in the immediate vicinity of the project. Furthermore, the project site is not zoned for agricultural use, the project site is not included in a Williamson Act contract, and there is no reason to believe the project would conflict with any existing agricultural uses. Therefore, no impact is expected from a conflict with existing agricultural uses. c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g) or conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? (No Impact) The project site is not considered forest land as defined by California Public Resources Code Section 12220(g), timberland as defined by California Public Resources Code Section 4526, or zoned Timberland Production as defined by Government Code section 51104(g). Furthermore, the project site is within the R-15 district and the proposed use is an allowed use within the zoning district. Thus, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land or timberland. California Public Resources Code Section 12220, under the Forest Legacy Program Act, defines "forest land" as land that can support 10 percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. Public Resources Code 4526, under the Forest Practice Act, defines "timberland" as land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of any commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. Commercial species are determined by the board on a district basis after consultation with the district committees and others. California Government Code 51104, under the Timberland Productivity Act, defines "timberland" as privately owned land, or land acquired for state forest purposes, which is devoted to and used for growing and harvesting timber, or for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses, and which is capable of growing an average annual volume of wood fiber of at least 15 cubic feet per acre. "Timberland production zone" or "TPZ" means an area which has been zoned pursuant to Section 51112 or 51113 of the Government Code and is devoted to and used for growing and harvesting timber, or for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses, as defined in Public Resources Code 4526 or 12220. With respect to the general plans of cities and counties, "timberland preserve zone" means "timberland production zone." As stated in the Contra Costa County General Plan, no land is used for timber harvesting in the County. d) Would the project involve or result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? (No Impact) The project site is not considered forest land, as discussed in “c” above. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? (No Impact) The proposed project would add 10 single-family residences to a residentially zoned property in a residential area. This improvement would not remove any land from potential agricultural production. Thus, the project would have no impact on the conversion of farmland. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Land Use Element. • California Department of Conservation. Accessed July 19, 2021. Contra Costa County Important Farmland 2016. • Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. Accessed July 19, 2021. 2016 Agricultural Preserves Map. http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/882/Map-of-Properties- Under-Contract?bidId= 3. AIR QUALITY – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? SUMMARY: a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) Contra Costa County is within the San Francisco Bay air basin, which is regulated by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) pursuant to the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. The purpose of the Clean Air Plan is to bring the air basin into compliance with the requirements of Federal and State air quality standards. BAAQMD has prepared CEQA Guidelines to assist lead agencies in air quality analysis, as well as to promote sustainable development in the region. The CEQA Guidelines support lead agencies in analyzing air quality impacts. If, after proper analysis, the project’s air quality impacts are found to be below the significance thresholds, then the air quality impacts may be considered less than significant. The Air District developed screening criteria to provide lead agencies and project applicants with a conservative indication of whether the proposed project could result in potentially significant air quality impacts. If all of the screening criteria are met by a proposed project, then the lead agency or applicant would not need to perform a detailed air quality assessment of their project’s air pollutant emissions. The proposed project could result in the future construction of ten single-family residences and associated development on the project site. This would be well below the BAAQMD screening criteria threshold of 56 dwelling units. Therefore, a detailed air quality analysis is not necessary. In addition to the screening threshold, a project must also include BAAQMD Best Management Practices (BMPs) for constriction to be consistent with the Clean Air Plan. Thus, the following Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 would be included as part of the project to ensure consistency with the plan. Air Quality 1: The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans. 1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. 2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. 3. All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. 4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. 5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. 6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. 7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. 8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) The region is in nonattainment for the federal and state ozone standards, the state PM10 standards, and the federal and state PM2.5 standards. As discussed above, the proposed project would not result in significant emissions of criteria air pollutants during the construction period or during project operation. Although the proposed project would contribute small increments to the level of criteria air pollutants in the atmosphere, the project would have a less than significant adverse environmental impact on the level of any criteria pollutant, because it is below the screening threshold. Nevertheless, the applicant has provided the following emissions estimates for the project. Construction Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, was used to estimate the proposed project’s construction emissions. CalEEMod provides a consistent platform for estimating construction and operational emissions from a wide variety of land use projects and is the model recommended by the BAAQMD for estimating project emissions. Estimated construction emissions have been compared with the applicable thresholds of significance established by the BAAQMD to assess ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5 construction emissions to determine significance for this criterion. As shown in the table below, the proposed project would be constructed in an estimated total of 320 workdays. For a more detailed description of the construction parameters used in estimating air pollutant emissions modeling, please refer to Appendix A of the applicant provided supplemental Initial Study document. Construction Activity Start Date End Date Working Days per Week Total Number of Working Days Demolition 3/1/2023 3/14/2023 5 10 Site Preparation 3/15/2023 3/28/2023 5 10 Grading 3/29/2023 7/18/2023 5 80 Building Construction 7/19/2023 4/23/2024 5 200 Paving 4/24/2024 4/30/2024 5 5 Architectural Coating 5/1/2024 5/21/2024 5 15 Source: CalEEMod Output Files, Appendix A. The following table presents the average daily construction emissions compared with the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds. Construction Activity Air Pollutants1 (tons/year) ROG NO X PM 10 (Exhaust) PM 2.5 (Exhaust) Demolition 0.01 0.11 <0.01 <0.01 Site Preparation 0.01 0.14 <0.01 <0.01 Grading 0.07 0.72 0.03 <0.01 Building Construction 2023 0.10 0.90 0.04 0.04 Building Construction 2024 0.07 0.59 0.03 0.02 Paving <0.01 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 Architectural Coating 0.08 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Total Emissions (tons) 0.34 2.49 0.11 0.08 Daily Average Total Emissions (lbs) 689.56 4,985.60 222.08 161.96 Construction Activity Air Pollutants1 (tons/year) ROG NO X PM 10 (Exhaust) PM 2.5 (Exhaust) Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day)2 2.15 15.58 0.69 0.51 Significance Threshold (lbs/day) 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Notes: lbs = pounds NO X = oxides of nitrogen PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases 1 Totals may not add up due to rounding. Calculations use unrounded totals. 2 Calculated by dividing the total lbs of emissions by the total number of nonoverlapping working days of construction (320 workdays). Source: CalEEMod Output (see Appendix A). As shown in the table, the construction emissions from all construction activities are below the recommended thresholds of significance; therefore, project construction would have less than significant impact related to emissions of ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5. As previously discussed, the proposed project would implement Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 for dust control to reduce potential impacts related to fugitive dust emissions during project construction. Given the project is below the numeric threshold for number of units and screening threshold for individual emissions, project construction would have a less than significant impact with mitigation. Operational Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 Operational emissions would include area, energy, and mobile sources. Area sources include emissions from architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscape equipment, while energy sources include emissions from the combustion of natural gas for water and space heating. Mobile sources include exhaust and road dust emissions from the vehicles that would travel to and from the project site. Pollutants of concern include ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5. The applicant analyzed project operations based on a 2024 starting date, the first calendar year of potential operation. The major sources for proposed operational emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 include motor vehicle traffic, use of natural gas, and the occasional repainting of buildings. The average daily and annual emissions are presented in the following table. Operational emissions of the respective pollutants were calculated using CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0. For detailed assumptions used to estimate emissions, see Appendix A of the applicant provided supplemental Initial Study document. Emissions Source Criteria Pollutants ROG NO X PM 10 (Total) PM 2.5 (Total) Annual Emissions Summary (tons/year) Area 0.22 0.00 0.01 0.01 Energy 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 Mobile (Motor Vehicles) 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.02 Total Project Emissions 0.26 0.06 0.09 0.04 Thresholds of Significance 10 10 15 10 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Average Daily Emissions Summary (lbs/day) Project Emissions (lbs/year) 527 128 189 72 Average Daily Project Emissions (lbs/day)1 1.44 0.35 0.52 0.20 Thresholds of Significance 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Notes: NO X = nitrous oxides. PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases 1 For average daily emissions, the proposed project is assumed to operate 365 days per year. Therefore, the annual tonnage of emissions is multiplied by 2,000 pounds per ton to identify total pounds of emissions and divided by 365 days per year to identify average daily emissions. Source: CalEEMod Output (see Appendix A). As shown in the table, the proposed project would not exceed the BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance during operation, indicating that ongoing project operations would not be considered to have the potential to generate a significant quantity of air pollutants. Therefore, long-term operational impacts associated with criteria pollutant emissions generated by the proposed project would be less than significant. Operational Carbon Monoxide Hotspot The CO emissions from traffic generated by the proposed project could be a concern at the local level. Congested intersections can result in the potential for high, localized concentrations of CO, known as a CO hotspot. The BAAQMD recommends a screening analysis to determine whether a project has the potential to contribute to a CO hotspot. The screening criteria identify when site-specific CO dispersion modeling is necessary. The proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to air quality for local CO if all the following screening criteria are met: 1. The project is consistent with an applicable Congestion Management Program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans; and 2. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and 3. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway). As indicated by the Transportation Planning Division in the letter titled, “County File #SD20-9531 – 30-Day Comments,” the proposed project would not exceed the County adopted Transportation Analysis Guidelines VMT screening threshold. Per the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less would be expected to have less than significant VMT impacts. As a result, since the proposed project would develop 10 residential units, the proposed project would be below the screening threshold. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Contra Costa County guidelines and the applicable congestion management agency. As described previously, the proposed project would not meet the County Transportation Analysis Guidelines threshold and as such, no transportation impact analysis was required for the proposed project, because the project would be expected to result in less than significant impacts related to VMT. Thus, the proposed project’s anticipated trip generation would not be expected to result in a significant increase in traffic volumes on nearby intersections. Therefore, the addition of proposed project traffic volumes would not result in nearby intersections experiencing traffic volumes of 44,000 or more vehicles per hour. CO hotspots can still occur when a transportation facility’s design or orientation prevents the adequate dispersion of CO emissions from vehicles, resulting in the accumulation of local CO concentrations. The design or orientation of a transportation facility that may prevent the dispersion of CO emissions include tunnels, parking garages, bridge underpasses, natural or urban canyons, below-grade roadways, or other features where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. However, adjacent roadways that would receive new vehicle trips generated by the proposed project do not include transportation facilities where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. Grayson Road would receive vehicle trips generated by the proposed project and is an exposed surface roadway with none of the design features discussed above that could prevent atmospheric mixing. Therefore, the proposed project is considered consistent with the local Congestion Management Program. Based on the above criteria, the proposed project would not exceed the CO screening criteria and would have a less than significant impact related to CO. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Less Than Significant With Mitigation) Subdivision of the 3.05-acre Project Site, and future occupancy of the 10 single-family residences would not cause any localized emissions that could expose sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences, schools) to unhealthy long-term air pollutant levels. As detailed in section b) above, the emissions from construction of the project are expected to be below BAAQMD screening criteria pollutants. Construction activities, however, could result in localized emissions of dust and diesel exhaust that could result in temporary impacts to nearby single-family residences. The applicant has provided an air quality analysis for these impacts which provides the following information. Air dispersion modeling was utilized to assess the project’s potential health risks using American Meteorological Society/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Version 22112, which is the air dispersion model accepted by the EPA and the BAAQMD for preparing HRAs. As previously discussed, project construction is anticipated to start in March 2023 and conclude in May 2024. The following AERMOD modeling parameters were utilized to identify the DPM concentration at identified receptors. 1. Sensitive receptors (e.g., schools, daycare facilities, hospitals, care facilities, residences) in the immediate project vicinity are represented in the model with discrete Cartesian receptors at a flagpole height of 1.5 meters. No schools, daycares, or community centers, are located within 1,250 feet of the proposed project site. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site represented in the air dispersion modeling include the following: a. Single-family residences immediately adjacent to the project site boundary to the north, east, south, and west. 2. AERMOD’s default regulatory dispersion option was selected. 3. The Urban dispersion coefficient was used as greater than 50 percent of the land surrounding the project site is currently developed. 4. Emissions were characterized in the model using various area and volume sources to represent different activities. The following describes the emission sources utilized in the model for each model scenario. a. On-site construction activities are represented with one polygon area source across the entire project site. b. Off-site construction hauling and vendor truck operation for project construction is represented with line volume sources on Grayson Road and parts of Reliz Valley Road. Off-site emissions were adjusted to account for off-site emissions that would occur within 1,000 feet of the project site (see Off-Site PM2.5 Exhaust Adjustment Sheet in Appendix A). 5. Meteorological data from the Livermore Municipal Airport Air Monitoring Station was used in AERMOD. This station was selected as it resembles physical site characteristics and elevation generally representative of the project site. Data from the station was pre-processed by the BAAQMD. The model used the most recent six years of data (2012 to 2017). The MIR during project construction were found at a residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the east of the northeast corner of the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). The following table presents a summary of the proposed project’s construction cancer risk, chronic non-cancer hazard, and annual PM2.5 concentration impacts at each MIR. As discussed in b) above, Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 would be required to reduce fugitive dust emissions during construction. Construction and grading activities would produce combustion emissions from various sources, including heavy equipment engines, paving, and motor vehicles used by the construction workers. Dust would be generated during site clearing, grading, and construction activities, with the most dust occurring during grading activities. The amount of dust generated would be highly variable and would be dependent on the size of the area disturbed, amount of activity, soil conditions, and meteorological conditions. Although grading and construction activities would be temporary, such activities could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact during project construction. Consequently, the applicant would be required to implement the recommended BAAQMD mitigation measures to reduce construction dust and exhaust impacts outlined in Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1. Impact Scenario Cancer Risk (risk per million) Chronic Non-Cancer Hazard Index Annual PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Residential MIR1 44.45 0.04123 0.20616 BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance 10 1 0.3 Exceeds Individual Source Threshold? Yes No No Notes: µ/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor 1 The Off-Site Residential MIR represents a residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the east of the northeast corner of the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). Source: Appendix A Applicant Supplemental Initial Study. As shown in the table, the proposed project could result in potentially significant health impacts to the maximally impacted receptor prior to the incorporation of cleaner than average on-site construction equipment. Therefore, Mitigation Measure Air Quality 2 would be required to reduce health risk impacts to sensitive receptors from construction of the proposed project. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact on the sensitive receptors during project construction to a less than significant level. The following table summarizes the health and hazard impacts at the maximum impacted sensitive receptor from construction of the project after the implementation of Mitigation Measure Air Quality 2, which would require the use of off-road construction equipment that meet emissions standards for Tier IV engines for all equipment with engines greater than 50 horsepower, as detailed below. Impact Scenario Cancer Risk (risk per million) Chronic Non-Cancer Hazard Index Annual PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Residential MIR1 6.49 0.00602 0.03011 BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance 10 1 0.3 Exceeds Individual Source Threshold? No No No Notes: µ/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor 1 The Off-Site Residential MIR represents a residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the east of the northeast corner of the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). Source: Appendix A. Air Quality 2: During construction activities, all off-road equipment with engines greater than 50 horsepower shall meet either United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or California Air Resource Board (ARB) Tier IV off-road emission standards. The construction contractor shall maintain records documenting compliance with this requirement, including equipment lists. Off-road equipment descriptions and information may include but are not limited to equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. Though the project is under the screening threshold for an air quality analysis, the applicant performed a cumulative Health Risk Assessment that examined the cumulative impacts of the proposed project’s construction emissions and sources of TAC emissions within 1,000 feet of the project site. As noted in the table below, the cumulative impacts from the project construction and existing sources of TACs would be less than the BAAQMD’s cumulative thresholds of significance. Thus, the cumulative health risk impacts from project construction would be less than significant. Source/Impact Scenario Source Type Distance from MIR1 (feet) Cancer Risk (per million) Chronic HI PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Project MIR Project Construction (Unmitigated) Diesel Construction Equipment 30 44.45 0.04123 0.20616 Project Construction (Mitigated) Diesel Construction Equipment 30 6.49 0.00602 0.03011 Existing Stationary Sources Not Applicable — – – – – Roadways Air Basin Existing Major Roadway Network – 1.16075 ND 0.02043 Grayson Road 40 9.11 ND 0.170 Rail Air Basin Railways – 0.22829 ND 0.00036 Freeways Air Basin Highways – 2.59105 ND 0.05598 Cumulative Health Risks Cumulative Maximum with Project DPM Emissions (Unmitigated) 57.54 0.04 0.45 Cumulative Maximum with Project DPM Emissions (Mitigated) 19.58 0.01 0.28 BAAQMD’s Cumulative Thresholds of Significance 100 10 0.8 Threshold Exceeded in Any Scenario? No No No Notes: BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District HI = Hazard Index MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor ND = no data available µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter 1 The MIR above represents the greatest impacted MIR, which is the residence immediately adjacent to the east of the northeast corner for the project site (located at 37°56'52.4"N 122°05'38.5"W). Source: Appendix A. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigations) The proposed project would not produce any major sources of odor and is not located in an area with existing issues (e.g. landfills, treatment plants). Therefore, the operation of the project would have a less than significant impact in terms of odors. During construction and grading, diesel powered vehicles and equipment used on the site could create localized odors. These odors would be temporary; however, there could be a potentially significant adverse environmental impact during project construction due to the creation of objectionable odors. Consequently, the applicant is required to implement Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 above. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the impact from the creation of objectionable odors to a less than significant level Sources of Information • Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017. Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. • Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017. Air Quality Guidelines. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? SUMMARY: Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) A Biological Resources Analysis Report (BRA) was prepared for the project by Olberding Environmental, Inc. (OBI) in May 2021, and subsequently updated in February 2022. A BRA Addendum was prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting (JMC) LLC in November 2022, adding to and partially revising the BRA prepared by OBI in February 2022. As described in the BRA prepared by JMC, The project site supports four habitat types: mixed woodland (0.21 acre), riparian woodland (1.01 acres), Valley Oak woodland (1.18 acres), and developed land (0.21 acre). Grayson Creek flows along the southern boundary of the project site from west to east through a riparian corridor. The project site currently contains 130 trees over 6 inches in diameter. A number of these trees are classified by the County as Protected Trees under the Contra Costa Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. The Olberding BRA utilized the California Natural Diversity Database (CNBBD), maintained by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California, to identify the likelihood that a plant or animal species would be present on the project site. According to the Orlberding report, four special-status plant species have a potential to occur on the project site: Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), Diablo helianthella (Helianthella castanea), Mount Diablo fairy-lantern (Calochortus pulchellus), and bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris). The April 2021 survey of the project site coincided with the blooming period for three of these species (Diablo helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy lantern, bent-flowered fiddleneck) and these species were not observed. However, as described in the JMC Addendum, consistent with CDFW comments on the previously circulated IS/MND, in the absence of protocol-level rare plant surveys for the remaining three species, the presence of Diablo helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy- lantern, and bent-flowered fiddleneck cannot be ruled out. Since the proposed project would require grading within suitable habitat for special-status plants, grading activities within suitable habitat could result in direct impacts to special-status plants through habitat loss or degradation. Thus, implementation of the following Mitigation Measure Biology 1 would require rare plant surveys in advance of construction commencement. Pursuant to the surveys, if State or federally listed plants are discovered on-site, the CDFW and/or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) compensatory mitigations and avoidance and minimization measures will be requirements to minimize special-status plant habitat loss. If rare plant species are found, the mitigation measure requires seed and root stock salvaging to be conducted to preserve the special-status plants. With implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 1, impacts to special-status plant species will be minimized to less than significant. Biology 1: In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol- level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol- level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. The JMC Addendum and Olberding BRA identified that the potential for wildlife to occur on the project site was based on the presence of suitable habitats and occurrences recorded by the CNDDB within the Walnut Creek quadrangle and eight surrounding quadrangles. A total of five bird species were identified to have a moderate to high potential to occur on the project site in a nesting or foraging capacity. The red- shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) all have a high potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. The sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) and American kestrel (Falco sparverius) have a moderate potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk, sharp- skinned hawk, and destrel) were present, and observed foraging on the project site. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed on the project site exhibiting nesting behaviors. Based on this information and comments from CDFW on the previously circulated initial study, the following Mitigation Measures Biology 2 and Biology 3 would be incorporated as part of the project. Biology 2: All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Biology 3: If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF) in the 5-mile radius of the project site. Additionally, during the April 2021 survey, the Project Biologist identified suitable habitat for the CRLF. Furthermore, USFWS designated CRLF critical habitat is located approximately 1.6 miles west of the project site. For these reasons, the Project Biologist stated that CRLF has a moderate potential to occur on the project site, and potential impacts to the species could occur. Amphibian and reptile special-status species such as the western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and California red-legged frog (CRLF) (Rana draytonii) have the potential to disperse through the riparian corridor and upland areas. Thus, project grading could result in the disturbance or loss of special- status individuals. However, with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measures Biology 4 and Biology 5, pre-construction surveys, exclusion fencing, Environmental Awareness training, and USFWS-approved capture and relocation if species are found would be implemented to minimize the impacts of project-related activities on special-status amphibians and reptiles within the riparian corridor to less than significant levels. Biology 4: A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. Biology 5: Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red-legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. Additionally, Grading and excavation activities could expose soil to increased rates of erosion during construction periods. During construction, runoff from the project site could adversely affect aquatic life within the adjacent water features. Surface water runoff could remove particles of fill or excavated soil from the site, or could erode soil down-gradient, if the flow were not controlled. Deposition of eroded material in adjacent water features could increase turbidity, thereby endangering aquatic life, and reducing wildlife habitat. Implementation of appropriate mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to aquatic organisms would be avoided or minimized. Biology 6: A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. In addition, the CDFW will determine adequate protection measures through the Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA). Implementation of all measures and conditions defined by CDFW to protect Grayson Creek and its associated riparian habitat, in addition to implementation of the discussed mitigation measures above would reduce impacts to special-status species within Grayson Creek and its associated habitats to a level considered less than significant under CEQA. Several special-status species have the potential to occur within the upland areas of the project site (i.e., non-riparian vegetation and habitats). These upland areas may be used by foraging and nesting raptors species specified above. The project plans to remove 32 native and eight non-native trees within the upland community. Removal of these trees would impact raptor foraging and nesting bird habitat. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 7 described below, removed trees within the valley oak woodland will be replaced, native vegetation within landscaping will be prioritized, and nesting bird surveys and non-disturbance buffers will be implemented if nesting birds are discovered. These measures would remediate for habitat loss and would minimize impacts to raptor foraging and nesting bird habitat in the uplands to less than significant. Biology 7: Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. Mammals, such as the western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) could use large trees and existing residential buildings for roosting opportunities and foraging habitat within the site. Implementation of the project would result in the demolition of the existing residences along with 40 trees. Tree removal partnered with any project-related construction lighting would result in the disturbance of roosting bats and the loss of roosting and foraging bat habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 8 would include surveys to identify roosting bats with a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan implemented if roosting bats are discovered. Implementation of this measure would reduce impacts to roosting bats to less than significant. Biology 8: For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special-status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: • To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. • Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. • If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artif,icial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. The Alameda whipsnake could also disperse through the site’s upland habitat, and project grading could result in the disturbance or loss of this species. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 4, pre-construction surveys and Environmental Awareness training would help to identify and avoid dispersing individuals, minimizing the impacts of project-related activities on the Alameda whipsnake to less than significant. As described in the JMC BRA Addendum, with the implementation of all mitigation measures and conditions defined through the SAA, or other permits related to the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) compliance, if determined necessary by the trustee agencies, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. Impacts would be considered less than significant with mitigation. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? As detailed in the JMC BRA Addendum, the project site contains two sensitive natural communities: Riparian Woodland and Valley Oak Woodland. Project implementation would require grading work within 0.21 acre of the riparian habitat located on the project site, resulting in habitat loss and disturbance. The mixture of oaks, bays, and buckeyes along with the dense cover of shrubby understory vegetation provide wildlife with many different food sources, nesting opportunities and cover from predators. Project implementation would result in removal of approximately 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland, which is considered a sensitive natural community and is an oak woodland protected under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 6, and Biology 7 would include replacement of riparian trees removed from the project site, installation of erosion control measures, and implementation of post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation. Impacts to riparian habitat would be reduced to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through avoidance and minimization of impacts to riparian habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. In addition to the mitigations above, the CDFW would require a SAA. Implementation of all measures and conditions defined by CDFW to protect riparian habitats would reduce impacts to sensitive natural communities such as Grayson Creek and its associated habitat to a level considered less than significant under CEQA. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) Grayson Creek is a perennial creek that flows along the southern boundary of the project site from west to east through an oak woodland riparian corridor and is a jurisdictional water regulated under the authority of the Army Corps of Engineers, RWQCB, and CDFW. As previously discussed, project implementation would result in impacts regulated under CDFW’s Fish and Game Code Sections 1600-1607, requiring an SAA. Implementation of all measures and conditions defined by the CDFW to protect Grayson Creek and its associated riparian habitat, in addition to implementation of Mitigation measures Biology 2 and Biology 6 would reduce impacts to Grayson Creek and its associated habitats and fish and wildlife resources to a level considered less than significant under CEQA. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) As detailed in the Olberding Biological Resources Analysis Report, and updated in the JMC Addendum, a riparian woodland corridor and upland non-riparian habitat are on the project site. The Grayson Creek corridor and its associated riparian habitat are presumed to act as a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursery sites. The Olberding BRA identifies the Grayson Creek corridor as providing potential suitable foraging and/or dispersal habitat for CRLF, Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and western pond turtle. Additionally, the Olberding BRA identifies suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor. It is presumed that the Grayson Creek riparian habitat would provide wildlife nursery sites due to the combination of presence of suitable nesting/roosting and aquatic habitats. The project design incorporates a stream setback along the north side of the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities, project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian wildlife corridor and nursery site. Grading activities within this wildlife corridor could result in direct impacts to terrestrial individuals using the corridor for dispersal. Tree removal would also result in the loss of nesting bird and roosting bat habitat. The project design incorporates a stream setback along the north side of the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities, project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian wildlife corridor and nursery site. Grading activities within this wildlife corridor could result in direct impacts to terrestrial individuals using the corridor for dispersal. Tree removal would also result in the loss of nesting bird and roosting bat habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measures Biology 2 through Biology 6, which require tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, and installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to wildlife corridors and nursery sites to less than significant through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2 through Biology 6, which requires tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to wildlife corridors and nursery sites to less than significant through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. Additionally, adequate protection of all fish and wildlife resources, including wildlife movement corridors and nursery sites will be defined by the CDFW through the SAA. The SAA program is designed to avoid, minimize, and mitigate any impacts on stream- related resources to a less than significant level under CEQA, and no additional mitigation measures would be necessary. With compliance with all measures defined by the CDFW through the SAA, potential project-related impacts on Grayson Creek and associated fish and wildlife resources, including wildlife movement corridors, nursery sites and other biological resources associated with the riparian habitat are considered less than significant under CEQA Guidelines. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) Vegetation and wildlife policies, including the removal of mature trees, and water resource policies are regulated by Contra Costa County through the Contra Costa General Plan and the Contra Costa Ordinance Code, including the Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance and Creek Setback Ordinance. The following describes the project’s compliance with General Plan policies that are applicable to the proposed project. Policy 8-6: Significant trees, natural vegetation, and wildlife populations generally shall be preserved. Multiple trees on the property will be preserved and others will be replaced. Specifically, a majority of the riparian habitat would be avoided. As described in the JMC Addendum, understory plants on-site would not be considered natural vegetation meriting protection. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 3 would reduce impacts to special-status plants through avoidance and Biology 2 through Biology 6 would reduce impacts to wildlife populations through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to trees. Policy 8-7: Important wildlife habitats which would be disturbed by major development shall be preserved, and corridors for wildlife migration between undeveloped lands shall be retained. Project-related impacts to nesting birds, roosting bats, and dispersing reptiles and amphibians would be reduced to less than significant as discussed above. Policy 8-8: Significant ecological resource areas in the County shall be identified and designated for compatible low-intensity land uses. Setback zones shall be established around the resource areas to assist in their protection. Areas determined to contain significant ecological resources, particularly those containing endangered species, are maintained throughout the County. Implementation of the project would include the preservation of trees and dedication of the creek area to the County ensuring continued preservation of the most valuable habitat portions of the property. Policy 8-9: Areas determined to contain significant ecological resources, particularly those containing endangered species, shall be maintained in their natural state and carefully regulated to the maximum legal extent. Acquisition of the most ecologically sensitive properties within the County by appropriate public agencies shall be encouraged. As discussed above, the most valuable creek portion of the property would be dedicated to the County. Additionally, mitigation measures would avoid sensitive species and restore habitat impacted by the property, providing consistency with the policy by protecting the species and habitat. Policy 8-10: Any development located or proposed within significant ecological resource areas shall ensure that the resource is protected. The project site does not occur within or near any County-designated ecologically significant resource areas. Furthermore, habitat areas on the property would be preserved or avoided to the extent possible. Policy 8-12: Natural woodlands shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible in the course of land development. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2 and Biology 7, which would include replacement of trees removed from the project site would reduce impacts to valley oak woodland to less than significant. Policy 8-15: Existing vegetation, both native and non-native, and wildlife habitat areas shall be retained in the major open space areas sufficient for the maintenance of a healthy balance of wildlife populations. Consistent with this policy, approximately 79 percent of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor would be avoided by project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring on-site). Policy 8-21: The planting of native trees and shrubs shall be encouraged in order to preserve the visual integrity of the landscape, provide habitat conditions suitable for native wildlife, and ensure that a maximum number and variety of well-adapted plants are sustained in urban areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2 and Biology 7 would include replacement of trees removed from the project site with native trees of the same species, if appropriate, landscape plans would prioritize native vegetation. Policy 8-23: Runoff of pollutants and siltation into marsh and wetland areas from outfalls serving nearby urban development shall be discouraged. Where permitted, development plans shall be designed in such a manner that no such pollutants and siltation will significantly adversely affect the value or function of wetlands. In addition, berms, gutters, or other structures should be required at the outer boundary of the buffer zones to divert runoff to sewer systems for transport out of the area. The proposed project has been designed to treat and store stormwater on-site within a detention basin, with excess waters passing into the storm drainage system within Grayson Road. The project design likewise incorporates a 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. Finally, Implementation of the Mitigation Measure Biology 6 which would include installation of erosion control measures would further avoid project impacts to Grayson Creek. Policy 8-78: Where feasible, existing natural waterways shall be protected and preserved in their natural state, and channels which already are modified shall be restored. A natural waterway is defined as a waterway which can support its own environment of vegetation, fowl, fish and reptiles, and which appears natural. The dedication of the creek area of the property to the County would ensure the preservation of the waterway in perpetuity. Policy 8-86: Existing native riparian habitat shall be preserved and enhanced by new development unless public safety concerns require removal of habitat for flood control or other public purposes. The riparian corridor will be largely preserved with the dedication of the creek area to the County. Furthermore, implementation of the above biological mitigation measures and SAA conditions will ensure the riparian area that is impacted will be restored to preserve the habitat value of the riparian area. Policy 8-87: On-site water control shall be required of major new developments so that no increase in peak flows occurs relative to the site's pre-development condition, unless the Planning Agency determines that off-site measures can be employed which are equally effective in preventing adverse downstream impacts. The proposed project has been designed to treat and store stormwater on-site within a retention basin, with excess waters passing into the storm drainage system within Grayson Road. The proposed project plans on the removal of approximately 97 code-protected trees including native species such as coast live oak, valley oak, black walnut, and buckeye. Native trees and all trees greater than 6.5 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) are considered to be protected under the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 816-6, Ordinances 94-59, 94-22, Contra Costa County Code). With implementation of mitigation measures, the Project is not expected to conflict with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, including the Contra Costa County tree protection and setback ordinances: Biology 9: During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially: Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. f. All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wpcontent- /uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf When implemented, the prescribed mitigations would reduce potentially significant adverse impacts to protected trees to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (No Impact) There is one adopted habitat conservation plan in Contra Costa County: the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan / Natural Community Conservation Plan (HCP/NCCP). The plan was approved in May 2007 by the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy, comprised of the cities of Brentwood, Clayton, Oakley, and Pittsburg, and Contra Costa County. The HCP/NCCP establishes a coordinated process for permitting and mitigating the incidental take of endangered species in East Contra Costa County. The plan lists Covered activities that fall into three distinct categories: (1) all activities and projects associated with urban growth within the urban development area (UDA); (2) activities and projects that occur inside the HCP/NCCP preserves; and (3) specific projects and activities outside the UDA. As the project does not fall into any of these categories, the project is not covered by, or in conflict with the adopted HCP. Sources of Information • California Department of Fish and Wildlife. https://map.dfg.ca.gov/lands/. • Department of Conservation and Development, Site Visit Conducted by County Staff. • Olberding Environmental, Inc., May 2021. Biological Resources Analysis • DeBolt Civil Engineering, March 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • Traverso Tree Service, May 6, 2020. Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road. • Johnson Marigot Consulting (JMC) LLC. November 2022. Biological Resources Addendum. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? SUMMARY: Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5? (Less Than Significant Impact) Historical resources are defined in the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5 as resources that fit any of the following definitions: • Is listed in the California Register of Historic Places and has been determined to be eligible for listing by the State Historic Resources Commission; • Is included in a local register of historic resources, and identified as significant in a historical resource survey that has been or will be included in the State Historic Resources Inventory; or • Has been determined to be historically or culturally significant by a lead agency. The archaeological sensitivity map of the County’s General Plan (Figure 9-2), identifies the project area as “Largely Urbanized Area,” which may contain significant archeological resources. While unlikely since the site is fully disturbed, subsurface construction activities always have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. Historic resources can include wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. An Archaeological Survey Report and Historic Resources Evaluation Report, dated February 8, 2007, was prepared for the Project by Suzanne Baker of Archaeological/Historical Consultants. The following are excerpts from the Archaeological Survey and Historic Resources Evaluation Report. On February 5, 2007, Suzanne Baker of Archaeological/Historical Consultants conducted an on-foot archaeological reconnaissance of the project site. The ground was covered in systematic transects two to four meters apart. The ground surface was inspected for evidence of cultural occupation, including midden soil, shell, bone, modified lithic materials, fire- cracked rock, and historic debris and features. Soil was friable, medium brown clay silt containing only a little rock, principally angular pebbles. The two houses occupy much of the project site’s high ground. These and accompanying landscaping, driveways and outbuildings, such as sheds; were the principal impediments to surface observation. Vegetation also obscured the banks of the creek. This included trees, shrubs, and especially, dense groundcover like ivy, vincula, and berry vines. In the rest of the project site, ground visibility was somewhat obscured by a light spring grass cover. Grass was, however, kicked aside at intervals and there were numerous ground squirrel burrows that provided open surfaces for soil observation. Ground visibility in general ranged from fair to good in the open areas of much of the project site. Aside from introduced plants adjacent to the houses and some oleander shrubs and a line of small oak trees parallel and adjacent to Grayson Road, most vegetation occurred along the creek. This was a mix of native riparian species, including live oak, buckeye, blackberry, and introduced species, such as eucalyptus and pine trees, ivy and vincula. A few live oaks stand in the field at the west end of the project area. There are also several redwood trees near the creek, but it is unclear if these are native or were planted by the residents. There are redwoods in some of the drainages in the interior valleys of Contra Costa County. Findings No prehistoric or historic (over 50 years of age) archaeological sites or materials were found during the course of reconnaissance. Two residential structures over 50 years of age exist on the project site. The residence at 1024 Grayson Road was built about 1948 and that at 1026 Grayson Road in 1955. These were recorded on DPR 523 forms, photographed, and evaluated ( refer to Appendix 1 in the report). Significance Criteria The significance criteria for the California Register of Historic Places and the National Register of Historic Places are essentially the same. Section 101 of the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to “expand and maintain a national register of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture...” Part 60.4 of Chapter 1 of Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations outlines the criteria for evaluation of properties for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of State and local importance that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, including: a) That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or b) That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or c) That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that possess high artistic value, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or d) That have yielded, or maybe likely to yield information important in prehistory or history (36 CFR 60. 4). Integrity involves the authenticity of a given property and its ability to convey its significance. The seven aspects of integrity location, setting, design, workmanship, materials, feeling and association are used to measure and property' s integrity. Neither structures at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road is considered eligible for the California or National Registers of Historic Places. Although both have relatively good historic integrity, they are not associated with events or persons significant in local history ( Criteria A and B) and are not architecturally significant (Criterion C). An updated record search and literature review for the project site and its 0.5-mile radius were conducted on September 21, 2022, at the NWIC, located at Sonoma a State University in Rohnert Park, California. The purpose of this review was to access existing cultural resource survey reports, archaeological site records, historic aerial photographs, and historic maps to evaluate whether any previously documented prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, architectural resources, cultural landscapes, or other resources exist within or near the project site. The results of the NWIC indicated that there is one recorded historic-era resource within the project site (the two existing residences) and two prehistoric resources within a 0.5- mile radius of the project site. In addition, there is one area-specific survey report within the project site and 10 reports within a 0.5-mile search radius. However, as discussed above, No prehistoric or historic (over 50 years of age) archaeological sites or materials were found during the course of reconnaissance. On September 22, 2022, the applicant’s consultant First Carbon Solutions (FCS) contacted the NAHC to determine whether any sacred sites were located within the project site or its vicinity. A response was received on October 17, 2022, indicating that the Sacred Lands File search failed to locate the presence of Native American cultural resources within the project site. The NAHC included a list of 15 tribal representatives available for consultation. To ensure that all Native American knowledge and concerns over potential Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) that may be affected by the proposed project are addressed, a letter containing proposed project information was sent to each tribal representative on December 5, 2022. No responses have been received to date. NAHC correspondence and copies of the NAHC letters can be found in Appendix C of the FCS draft report. On June 10, 2021, the County, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21080.3.1 and AB 52, sent notification letters to the Wilton Rancheria Tribe. The County did not receive a response. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) As stated previously, the project site does not appear to host any historic archaeological resources. However, subsurface construction activities always have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. In keeping with the CEQA guidelines, if archaeological remains are uncovered, work at the place of discovery should be halted immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the finds. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the potentially significant impact to a less than significant level. With the implementation of Cultural Resources 1 impacts will be less than significant. Cultural Resources 1: All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Less Than Significant with Mitigation) The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground-disturbing activities. With adherence to existing regulations and with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 2 impacts will be less than significant. Cultural Resources 2: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: 1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 2 impacts will be less than significant. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Open Space Element. • Archaeological/Historical Consultants, February 2007. Archaeological Survey and Historic Resources Evaluation Report. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 6. ENERGY – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? SUMMARY: a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? (Less Than Significant Impact) Environmental effects related to energy include the project’s energy requirements and its energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type during construction and operation; the effects of the project on local and regional energy supplies; the effects of the project on peak and base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy; the degree to which the project complies with existing energy standards; the effects of the project on energy resources; and the project’s projected transportation energy use requirements and its overall use of efficient transportation alternatives, if applicable. The following factors demonstrate a project’s significance in relation to these effects: (1) Why certain measures were incorporated in the project and why other measures were dismissed; (2) The potential of siting, orientation, and design to minimize energy consumption, including transportation energy, increase water conservation and reduce solid-waste; (3) The potential for reducing peak energy demand; (4) Alternate fuels (particularly renewable ones) or energy systems; and (5) Energy conservation which could result from recycling efforts. New energy consumption includes energy required for operation of the expected new residence and transportation system (private and commercial vehicles), as well as energy used for construction and maintenance of the proposed project. Issues related to energy use include the levels of consumption of non-renewable and renewable energy sources for the construction and operation of the proposed project. The proposed project’s energy demand would be typical for a development of this scope and nature, and would comply with current state and local codes concerning energy consumption, including Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, enforced by the Building Inspection division. That the Legislature added the energy analysis requirement in CEQA at the same time that it created an Energy Commission authorized to impose building energy standards indicates that compliance with the building code is a necessary but not exclusive means of satisfying CEQA’s independent requirement to analyze energy impacts broadly. Thus, this report also considers energy consumption related to transportation and efficiency measures not included in the building design. The project is located in a urban residential neighborhood, within walking distance of a commercial district, and within biking distance of the Pleasant Hill Bart Station. The close proximity to these amenities could reduce the automobile trip generation from the project; thus, reducing energy consumption. Other measures that are included in the project that demonstrate the projects efficiency include a photovoltaic (PV) system as required by Title 24 (Energy Code). In addition vegetated landscaping, which would reduce the contamination and quantity of stormwater discharge from the site. Furthermore, compliance with the State Model Water Efficient Landscape requirements indicates that water related energy use would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. The anticipated construction schedule for the proposed project is estimated to last approximately 14 months. Dependent on which years the project is constructed, construction energy demand would likely decrease because of improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements as older, less efficient equipment is replaced by newer and cleaner equipment. The proposed project would require demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coating, and paving activities. Project construction would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of building materials, preparation of the site (e.g., site clearing, and grading), and the actual construction of the building. Petroleum-based fuels such as diesel fuel and gasoline would be the primary sources of energy for these tasks. The types of on-site equipment used during construction of the proposed project could include gasoline- and diesel-powered construction and transportation equipment, including trucks, bulldozers, frontend loaders, forklifts, and cranes. Construction equipment is estimated to consume a total of 38,214 gallons of diesel fuel over the entire construction duration. Fuel use associated with construction vehicle trips generated by the proposed project was also estimated; trips include construction worker trips, haul truck trips for material transport, and vendor trips for construction material deliveries. Fuel use from these vehicles traveling to the project site was based on (1) the projected number of trips the proposed project would generate during construction, (2) average trip distances by trip type, and (3) fuel efficiencies estimated in the ARB Emissions Factors model (EMFAC) mobile source emission model. In total, the proposed project is estimated to generate 156,684 VMT and a combined 7,516 gallons of gasoline and diesel for vehicle travel during construction. Other equipment could include construction lighting, field services (office trailers), and electrically driven equipment such as pumps and other tools. Singlewide mobile office trailers, which are commonly used in construction staging areas, generally range in size from 160 square feet to 720 square feet. A typical 720-square-foot office trailer would consume approximately 10,616 kilowatt-hours (kWh) during the 14-month construction. The proposed project’s construction is not anticipated to result in unusually high energy use. Limitations on idling of vehicles and equipment and requirements that equipment be properly maintained would result in fuel savings. Similarly, compliance with State regulations would limit idling from both on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment and are enforced by the ARB. Additionally, the overall construction schedule and process is already designed to be efficient to avoid excess monetary costs. For example, equipment and fuel are not typically used wastefully due to the added expense associated with renting the equipment, maintaining it, and fueling it. Therefore, the opportunities for future efficiency gains during construction are limited. The proposed 10 single-family homes would consume energy as part of building operations, such as building heating and cooling, and transportation activities from residents’ personal vehicles. Although the BAAQMD 2022 GHG thresholds prohibit natural gas in new development, the proposed project applicant received a notice of completeness for their application on December 17, 2020, which demonstrates the proposed project was designed prior to the new thresholds. As such, natural gas appliances would be included in the proposed project design. Energy consumption of the proposed project is summarized in following table. Annual Project Energy Consumption Energy Consumption Activity Annual Consumption Electricity Consumption 78,105 kWh/year Natural Gas Consumption 385,911 kBTU/year Total Fuel Consumption 7,341 gallons/year Notes: kBTU = kilo-British Thermal Unit kWh = kilowatt-hour Source: Appendix A of FCS Draft IS/MND Report Operation of the proposed project is estimated to consume 78,105 kWh of electricity and 385,911 kBTU of natural gas on an annual basis. The proposed project would be considered to result in a potentially significant impact if it would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. The proposed project would not exceed the County adopted Transportation Analysis Guidelines VMT screening threshold. Per the Transportation Analysis Guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less would be expected to have less than significant VMT impacts. As a result, since the proposed project would develop 10 residential units, the proposed project would be below the screening threshold. Therefore, the proposed project’s operational fuel consumption would not be significant because the proposed project would be consistent with County screening thresholds. Furthermore, the proposed project would include rooftop photovoltaic (PV) solar systems on each of the 10 homes, which would further reduce electricity demand. Considering the above analysis, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficiency, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. This impact would be less than significant. Given the above considerations, the project would have a less than significant impact due to energy consumption. b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? (Less Than Significant Impact) The Contra Costa County Climate Action Plan includes a number of Green House Gas (GHG) emission reduction strategies. The strategies include measures such as implementing standards for green buildings and energy-efficient buildings, reducing parking requirements, and reducing waste disposal. Green building codes and debris recovery programs are among the strategies currently implemented by the County. The project would not conflict with the policies outlined in the CAP. Furthermore, as the polices in the CAP are recommendations and not requirements, the project would not conflict with the CAP. Thus, the project would not be considered to have a significant impact. Furthermore, as previously stated, the proposed project’s energy demand would be typical for a development of this scope and nature, and would comply with current state and local codes concerning energy consumption, including Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, enforced by the Building Inspection division. The proposed project would be served with electricity provided by PG&E or MCE. As MCE is an optional provider PG&E has been described below. In 2021, PG&E obtained 48 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources, while the remaining electricity was sourced from nuclear (39 percent), large hydroelectric (4 percent), and natural gas (9 percent). PG&E also offers a Solar Choice 50 percent option that sources 71 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources, and a Solar Choice 100 percent option that sources 94 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project’s electricity provider meets the State’s current objective of 33 percent. The proposed project’s electricity provider would also be required to meet the State’s future objective of 60 percent of in-State electricity sales being generated from renewable energy sources by 2030. As stated above, the buildings would be designed in accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 24, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential Buildings as applicable. These standards include minimum energy efficiency requirements related to building envelope, mechanical systems (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] and water heating systems), and indoor and outdoor lighting. For example, the proposed project would install solar PV systems capable of generating on-site renewable electricity per year and low-flow plumbing fixtures and irrigation heads that are compliant with Title 24 Standards. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County, 2015. Municipal Climate Action Plan. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? SUMMARY a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Less Than Significant Impact) The California Geological Survey (CGS) has delineated Alquist-Priolo (A-P) zones along the known active faults in California. The nearest fault considered active by CGS is the Concord fault, which is mapped approximately 4.5 miles east of the project site. However, because the site is not within the Concord A- P zone, the risk of fault rupture is generally regarded as low. As a result, the potential impact from surface fault rupture would be less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) Figure 10-4 (Estimated Seismic Ground Response) of the County General Plan Safety Element identifies the site in an area rated “Lowest” damage susceptibility. The risk of structural damage from ground shaking is regulated by the building code and the County Grading Ordinance. The building code requires use of seismic parameters which allow structural engineers to design structures based on soil profile types and proximity of faults deemed capable of generating strong violent earthquake shaking. Quality construction, conservative design and compliance with building and grading regulations can be expected to keep risks within generally accepted limits. In addition, Mitigation Measure Geology 1 would require that all recommendations in the Geotechnical Exploration regarding site grading, demolition, foundation design, and construction are incorporated into project plans. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Geology 1 would ensure project design and construction plans take into consideration the unique site-specific seismic conditions to ensure the proposed structures can withstand seismic activities. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure Geology 1 and compliance with CBC requirements, the project impacts would be considered less than significant. Geology 1: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) Soil liquefaction results from loss of strength during cyclic loading, such as imposed by earthquakes. The soil considered most susceptible to liquefaction is clean, loose, saturated, uniformly graded fine sands below the groundwater table; however, low-plasticity silt and clay can also experience liquefaction (or cyclic-softening) under certain conditions. When seismic ground shaking occurs, the soil is subjected to cyclic shear stresses that can cause excess hydrostatic pressures to develop and liquefaction of susceptible soil to occur. According to the US Geological Survey (USGS) seismic hazard map (Figure 6), the site is mostly included in the “very low” liquefaction risk area. However, the south and southeast boundary of the site is mapped as “moderate” liquefaction risk area. In our explorations, we encountered relatively low-blow-count loose material at a depth between approximately 15 to 20 feet below the ground surface at the location of Boring 1-B1 (ENGEO 2019, pg. 25). Therefore, ENGEO performed liquefaction and cyclic softening analysis to evaluate the potential for these seismic hazards and potential effects at the project site. Boulanger and Idriss (2008) found that for practical purposes, soil can be divided into either “sand-like” or “clay-like” behavior. Where sand-like soil can experience “liquefaction” and clay-like soil can experience “cyclic failure or softening”. In general, sand-like soil tends to be gravel, sand, and very low- plasticity silt, whereas clay-like soil comprises clay and plastic silt. In order to evaluate the clay-like, intermediate, and sand-like behavior of the fined-grained soil at the site, ENGEO plotted PI and liquid limit (LL) of the tested soil relative to the soil behavior limits. Based on site-specific study of the liquefaction hazard, ENGEO conlcuded that the magnitude of the liquefaction/cyclic softening settlement is limited and can be accommodated by the proposed shallow foundation system, such as post tension slab foundations. Additionally, the site specific design required by Mitigation Measure Geology 1 would require implementation of measures to address any liquefaction concerns. Thus, the environmental impact from seismic-related ground failure would be considered to be less than significant. iv) Landslides? (Less Than Significant Impact) In 1975 the United States Geological Survey (USGS) issued photo-interpretation maps of landslide and other surficial deposits of Contra Costa County. This mapping is presented on page 10-24 of the Safety Element of the County General Plan. According to this USGS map, there are no suspected landslides in proximity of the proposed project. Within the site area being considered for development no landslides were identified. Four “definite or probable” landslides are mapped within 1,000 feet of the project site but none poses a hazard to the property. Detailed analysis of the site by Purcell, Rhoades & Associates confirms there are no slides on the parcel. In addition ENGEO conducted a subsequent geotechnical exploration, including borings of the site and determined that no slides occurred on the project site. Thus, a less than significant impact can be expected regarding landslide hazards. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Less Than Significant Impact) During construction, the proposed project would include grading and excavation that would expose a substantial amount of soil. Because the proposed project would disturb more than one acre of land, it would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit from the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) and to comply with its conditions and requirements, which are designed to minimize potential erosion issues. The proposed project would comply with the terms of the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and the County Ordinance Code Chapter 1014-4, which requires the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP includes Best Management Plans (BMPs) to ensure reduction of pollutants from construction activities potentially entering surface waters. Additionally, implementation of the SWPPP would also prevent pollutants from entering surrounding water courses in the project vicinity by preventing pollutants from moving off-site. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with Ordinance Code Division 716, Grading. Division 716 of the Ordinance Code provides regulations to ensure that soil would not be stripped and removed from lands, which can create hazards related to subsidence and faulty drainage. It also ensures grading is regulated to control erosion and sedimentation to protect water quality of water courses and water bodies. For example, Article 716-8.8 of the Ordinance Code would require that all erodible cut slopes more than 5 feet in height and fill slopes more than 3 feet in height be protected against erosion by planting with grass or ground cover plants, subject to review and recommendations provided by a County building official. Furthermore, the proposed project would be landscaped and would not leave disturbed soils exposed. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation) As discussed in a) iii above, the project site is in an area that has “moderate to low” liquefaction potential. Building and grading regulations can be expected to keep risks within generally acceptable limits. Furthermore, the site specific recommendations from the Geotechnical report required by Mitigation Measure Geology 1, would ensure any potential geological impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level. Thus, the environmental impact from an unstable geologic unit or soil would be considered to be less than significant. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation) With regard to its engineering properties, the surficial clayey soil which potentially indicates high expansion potential. Expansive soil can shrink and swell as a result of moisture changes. This shrinking and swelling can cause heaving and cracking of slabs- on-grade, pavements, and structures founded on shallow foundations. Therefore, construction of at-grade improvements will need to consider the potential impacts of expansive soil. Successful construction on expansive soil requires special attention during grading. It is imperative to keep exposed soil moist by occasional sprinkling. If the soil is dry, it is extremely difficult to remoisturize the soil (because of their clayey nature) without excavation, moisture conditioning, and recompaction. Building damage due to volume changes associated with expansive soil can be reduced by: (1) using a rigid mat foundation that is designed to resist the settlement and heave of expansive soil, (2) deepening the foundations to below the zone of moisture fluctuation, i.e. by using deep footings or drilled piers, and/or (3) using footings at normal shallow depths but bottomed on a layer of select fill having a low expansive potential. Conventional grading operations, incorporating fill placement specifications tailored to the expansive characteristics of the soil, and use of a mat foundation such as a post-tensioned are common, generally cost-effective measures to address the expansive potential of the foundation soils. Detailed foundation design criteria are provided by the project geotechnical report (ENGEO). It should be recognized that expansive soils are an engineering issue, and not a land use or feasibility issue. Thus, the environmental impact from a moderately expansive soil would be considered to be less than significant with incorporation of Mitigation Measure Geology 1. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? (No Impact) The project does not require a septic or wastewater-disposal system; the site receives waste water and sanitary service from the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, who have reviewed the project and stated that sufficient capacity exists to accommodate the project, therefore, no impact is expected. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (Less Than Significant Impact) Similar to archaeological resources, there is a possibility that previously undiscovered buried fossils and other paleontological resources could be present and accidental discovery could occur. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1 and Geology 2 would reduce the potentially significant impact to a less than significant level. No unique geologic features exist on the site. Thus, a less than significant impact would be expected with the included mitigations. Geology 2: The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. Sources of Information • ENGEO, October 4, 2019. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road. • Geologic Peer Review dated October 27, 2006. prepared by Darwin Myers Associates • Geologic Peer Review dated February 10, 2020. prepared by Darwin Myers Associates • Purcell and Rhodes, 2006. Geotechnical Reconnaissance • California Geological Survey, 1992. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Safety Element. • United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2019. Web Soil Survey. Accessed June 4, 2019. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? SUMMARY: a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? (Less Than Significant Impact) Greenhouse gases are gases that trap heat in the atmosphere and contribute to global climate change. Greenhouse gases include gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and various fluorocarbons commonly found in aerosol sprays. Typically, a single residential or commercial construction project in the County would not generate enough greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to substantially change the global average temperature; however, the accumulation of GHG emissions from all projects both within the County and outside the County has contributed and will contribute to global climate change. Senate Bill 97 directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop CEQA Guidelines for evaluation of GHG emissions impacts and recommend mitigation strategies. In response, OPR released the Technical Advisory: CEQA and Climate Change, and proposed revisions to the State CEQA guidelines (April 14, 2009) for consideration of GHG emissions. The California Natural Resources Agency adopted the proposed State CEQA Guidelines revisions on December 30, 2009 and the revisions were effective beginning March 18, 2010. The bright-line numeric threshold of 1,100 MT CO2/yr is a numeric emissions level below which a project’s contribution to global climate change would be less than “cumulatively considerable.” This emissions rate is equivalent to a project size of approximately 60 single-family dwelling units. Future construction and operation of the 10 new residences (8 net new residences as 2 existing homes will be demolished) would generate some GHG emissions; however, the amount generated would not result in a significant adverse environmental impact. As the project does not exceed the screening criteria, the project would not result in the generation of GHG emissions that exceed the threshold of significance. Furthermore, the applicant has provided the following GHG emissions analysis for the project. The proposed project would emit GHG emissions during construction from the off-road equipment, worker vehicles, and any hauling that may occur. The BAAQMD does not presently provide a construction GHG emission threshold but recommends that construction GHG emissions be quantified and disclosed. The BAAQMD also recommends that lead agencies (in this case, Contra Costa County) determine the level of significance of construction GHG emissions. Construction GHG Emissions Construction Phase MT CO 2 e per year Demolition 18 Site Preparation 17 Grading 111 Building Construction 2023 179 Building Construction 2024 124 Paving 4 Architectural Coating 2 Total Construction Emissions 456 Construction Thresholds1 1,100 Exceed Threshold? No Notes: MT CO 2 e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Totals may not add up due to rounding. 1 Construction-related threshold was obtained from SMAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines. Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix A) of the FCS Draft IS/MND Report. As shown in the above Table, the proposed project is expected to emit approximately 456 MT CO2e during construction, which would result in approximately 380 MT CO2e per year (456 divided by 1.2 years). Because the annual average and the total construction emissions would be less than the applied threshold of significance, the project’s construction-related GHG impacts would be less than significant. In order to determine the efficiency thresholds, first FCS determined the 2024 and 2030 CAP reduction target. As shown in Table 3.8 of the Contra Costa County CAP, the County set a 2020 reduction target of 1,193,070 MT CO2e and in 2035 of 596,540 MT CO2e. In order to determine the 2024 and 2030 reduction targets, FCS calculated the yearly GHG reductions that the County would need to make to reach their 2035 calculated reduction target of 596,540 MT CO2e. This calculation showed that the County would need to reduce annual GHG emissions by 36,939 MT CO2e per year. By 2024, after 4 years of projected reduction at a rate of 36,939 MT CO2e, the County would need to emit no more than 1,045,314 MT CO2e and by 2030 after 10 years of reductions, the County would need to emit no more than 751,133 MT CO2e to meet SB 32 goals of GHG emissions 40 percent below the 1990 levels. Next, the County’s GHG reduction target of 1,045,314 MT CO2e in 2024 and 751,133 MT CO2e in 2030 is divided by the estimated 2024 and 2030 unincorporated Contra Costa County service population. According to the Contra Costa County CAP Table 3.4, in 2024 unincorporated Contra Costa County would contain 168,072 residents and 48,378 jobs and 173,500 residents and 50,330 jobs in 2030. As a result, the 2024 efficiency threshold of 4.8 MT CO2e/service population/year and 2030 efficiency threshold of 3.4 MT CO2e/service population/year demonstrates the necessary County per capita GHG emissions needed to be consistent with SB 32 GHG reduction goals. Operational GHG emissions by source are shown in the below Table. The proposed project was analyzed assuming full buildout in the year 2024 immediately following construction. Operational GHG Emissions Emission Source Year 2024 Total Emissions (MT CO 2 e per year)1 Year 2030 Total Emissions (MT CO 2 e per year)1 Area 2 2 Energy 24 24 Mobile (Vehicles) 70 59 Waste 6 6 Water 1 1 Total Project Emissions 103 92 Service Population2 28 28 SB 32 Efficiency Threshold 4.8 MT CO 2 e/service population/year 3.4 MT CO 2 e/service population/year Project Emission Generation (MT CO 2 e/service population/year) 3.73 3.34 Exceeds Threshold? No No Notes: MT CO 2 e=metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 1 Emission totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. 2 Calculation: 2.78 persons per household x 10 dwelling units = 27.8 service population 3 Calculation: 103 MT CO 2 e per year/28 residents = 3.7 MT CO 2 e/service population/year 4 Calculation: 91 MT CO 2 e per year/28 residents = 3.3 MT CO 2 e/service population/year Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix A) of the FCS Draft IS/MND Report California Department of Finance. E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 1/1/2022. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/. Accessed November 7, 2022. As shown in the table, the proposed project would result in operational GHG Emissions of 103 MT CO2e in 2024 and 92 MT CO2e in 2030, which when divided by the service population of 28 residents, would result in 3.7 MT CO2e/service population/year in 2024 and 3.3 MT CO2e/service population/year. Consequently, the proposed project would not exceed the efficiency thresholds and demonstrates that the proposed project would contribute toward meeting the County’s CAP GHG reduction targets and SB 32 GHG emission reduction goals. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, and impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? (Less Than Significant Impact) At a regional scale, the BAAQMD adopted the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan that addresses GHG emissions as well as various criteria air pollutants. The BAAQMD Plan included a number of pollutant reduction strategies for the San Francisco Bay air basin, many of which would be included in the project through Title 24 energy efficiency requirement for the expected new residence. Within Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors convened a Climate Change Working Group (CCWG) in May 2005, to identify existing County activities and policies that could reduce GHG emissions. In November 2005, the CCWG presented its Climate Protection Report to the Board of Supervisors, which included a list of existing and potential GHG reduction measures. This led to the quantification of relevant County information on GHGs in the December 2008 Municipal Climate Action Plan. In April 2012, the Board directed the Department of Conservation and Development to prepare a Climate Action Plan (CAP) to address the reduction of GHG emissions in the unincorporated areas of the County. In December 2015, the Climate Action Plan was adopted by the Board of Supervisors. The Climate Action Plan includes a number of GHG emission reduction strategies. The strategies include measures such as implementing standards for green buildings and energy-efficient buildings, reducing parking requirements, and reducing waste disposal. Green building codes and debris recovery programs are among the strategies currently implemented by the County. The project does not conflict with the policies outlined in the CAP. The project will incorporate Contra Costa County Climate Action Plan (CCC) emission reduction measures (as referenced in Appendix E “Developer Checklist” of the CCC). Implementation of these emission reduction measures is considered a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy under the CCC and therefore meets the BAAQMD’s GHG threshold. Furthermore, as other measures identified in the CAP are recommendations and not requirements, the project would not conflict with the CAP and thus would not be considered to have a significant impact. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update addressing the SB 32 targets was adopted on December 14, 2017. The table below provides an analysis of the proposed project’s consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update measures. As shown in the table, many of the measures are not applicable to the proposed project, and the proposed project is consistent with strategies that are applicable. Consistency with SB 32 2017 Scoping Plan Update 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency SB 350: 50 Percent Renewable Mandate. Utilities subject to the legislation will be required to increase their renewable energy mix from 33 percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030. Not applicable. This measure would apply to utilities and not to individual development projects. The proposed project would purchase electricity from PG&E subject to the SB 350 Renewable Mandate. SB 350: Double Building Energy Efficiency by 2030. This is equivalent to a 20 percent reduction from 2014 building energy usage compared to current projected 2030 levels. Not applicable. This measure applies to existing buildings. New structures are required to comply with Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards that are expected to increase in stringency over time. The proposed project would comply with the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards in effect at the time building permits are received. Low Carbon Fuel Standard. This measure requires fuel providers to meet an 18 percent reduction in carbon content by 2030. Not applicable. This is a statewide measure that cannot be implemented by a project applicant or lead agency. However, vehicles used by future residents at the project site would benefit from the standards. Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels Scenario). Vehicle manufacturers will be required to meet existing regulations mandated by the LEV III and Heavy-Duty Vehicle programs. The strategy includes a goal of having 4.2 million Zero-Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) on the road by 2030 and increasing numbers of ZEV trucks and buses. Not applicable. This measure is not applicable to the proposed project; however, vehicles accessing the project site would benefit from the increased availability of cleaner technology and fuels. In addition, as stipulated by the most recently adopted California Building Code, Title 24, new one-family dwellings, such as the proposed project, would be required to implement the applicable provisions of Title 24, California Building Code to support future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Sustainable Freight Action Plan. The plan’s target is to improve freight system efficiency 25 percent by increasing the value of goods and services produced from the freight sector, relative to the amount of carbon that it produces by 2030. This would be achieved by deploying over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment capable of zero-emission operation and maximize near zero-emission freight vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030. Not Applicable. The proposed project is residential in nature and would not have any major freight vehicles operational. Short-Lived Climate Pollutant (SLCP) Reduction Strategy. The strategy requires the reduction of SLCPs by 40 percent from 2013 levels by 2030 and the reduction of black carbon by 50 percent from 2013 levels by 2030. Consistent. Consistent with BAAQMD Regulation 6, Rule 3, no wood-burning devices are proposed as part of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not include major sources of black carbon. 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies. Requires Regional Transportation Plans to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy for reduction of per capita VMT. Not applicable. The proposed project does not include the development of a Regional Transportation Plan. Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program. The Post 2020 Cap-and-Trade Program continues the existing program for another 10 years. The Cap-and- Trade Program applies to large industrial sources such as power plants, refineries, and cement manufacturers. Not applicable. The proposed project is not one targeted by the cap-and-trade system regulations, and, therefore, this measure does not apply to the proposed project. However, the post-2020 Cap- and-Trade Program indirectly affects people and entities who use the products and services produced by the regulated industrial sources when increased cost of products or services (such as electricity and fuel) are transferred to the consumers. Natural and Working Lands Action Plan. The ARB is working in coordination with several other agencies at the federal, State, and local levels, stakeholders, and with the public, to develop measures as outlined in the Scoping Plan Update and the governor’s Executive Order B-30-15 to reduce GHG emissions and to cultivate net carbon sequestration potential for California’s natural and working land. Not applicable. The proposed project is in a built-up urban area and would not be considered natural or working lands. Source of ARB 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measures: California Air Resource Board (ARB). 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November. Website: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf. Accessed October 25, 2022. Sources of Information • Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017. Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. • Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017. Air Quality Guidelines. • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8. Zoning Ordinance. • Contra Costa County, 2008. Municipal Climate Action Plan. Contra Costa County, 2015. Climate Action Plan. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? SUMMARY: a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Less Than Significant Impact) Subsequent to approval of the Tentative Vesting Parcel Map, it is expected that two existing single-family residence would be demolished and 10 new single family homes constructed on Lots 1-10. There would be associated use of fuels, lubricants, paints, and other construction materials during the construction period. The use and handling of hazardous materials during construction would occur in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, including California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (Cal/OSHA) requirements. With compliance with existing regulations, the project would have a less than significant impact from construction. Project operation would involve the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials in very small quantities as they relate to household use. Contra Costa County regulates household hazard disposal, and the home’s occupants would be responsible for proper handling and disposal of household materials. For example, household hazardous substances can be dropped off for free at one of the Contra Costa County Household Hazardous Waste Drop-off Facilities, located throughout the County. Because any hazardous materials used for household operations would be in small quantities, long‐ term impacts associated with handling, storing, and dispensing of hazardous materials from project operation would be considered less than significant. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed residential use of the site would not involve handling, use, or storage of substances that are acutely hazardous. The lot currently hosts two single family residences. No evidence reviewed by staff suggests that the project would include foreseeable conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment. Thus, with compliance with existing regulations, the project would have a less than significant impact. Historic aerials of the project site dated 1939 through 2018 show that the project site was used for agricultural purposes between 1939 and the 1940s. The houses, which would be demolished as part of the proposed project, were constructed in 1948 and 1959, respectively. Because of the age of the on-site structures, asbestos containing material (ACM) or lead-based paint (LBP) could be present. Because of the potential for ACMs and lead-based paints, the applicant would be required to retain a qualified hazardous materials contractor to remove and dispose of ACMs and LBPs in accordance with federal and State regulations. During project demolition and construction activities, there is always a limited risk of the accidental release of hazardous materials such as gasoline, oil, or fluids from construction equipment. However, use of these materials would be conducted in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, policies, and ordinances set forth by the EPA, State Water Board, DTSC, Cal/OSHA, Caltrans, RCRA, Contra Costa Environmental Health Department, and the CCCFPD. These include, but are not limited to, the following: • California Health and Safety Code Sections 25270.7, 25270.8, and 25507; • California Vehicle Code Section 23112.5; • California Public Utilities Code Section 7673 (PUC General Orders #22-B, 161); • California Government Code Sections 51018 and 8670.25.5(a); • California Water Code Sections 13271 and 13272; • California Labor Code Section 6409.1(b)10; and • NPDES Construction General Permit requirements. Compliance with the provisions of these regulations would help minimize the risk of accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment and that appropriate remediation measures are implemented in the event of an accidental release. As such, impacts related to the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (No Impact) The nearest school is the private school, Pleasant Hill Adventist Academy, located approximately a quarter mile east of the project site. As the project would not be expected to release hazardous materials into the environment, no impact on the school is expected. In addition, while construction of the proposed project could create hazardous emissions during construction, these emissions would be temporary, and the project applicant is required to comply with all safe transport, handling, and disposal requirements and regulations. Operation of the proposed single-family homes would not result in the emission or handling of large quantities of hazardous materials, substances, or waste. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (No Impact) The project site currently contains two single-family residences. A review of regulatory databases maintained by County, State, and federal agencies found no documentation of hazardous materials violations or discharge on the project site. The site is not listed on the State of California Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites (Cortese) List. California Government Code section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. The Cortese List is a planning document with hazardous material contaminated site information, used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. Because the project is not located on a listed hazardous materials site the project will not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment. e) For a project located within an airport land 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? (No Impact) The project site is not within an airport influence area, not within an airport safety zone, and outside of the 55-60 dB CNEL airport noise contour. Thus, there would be no hazard related to a public airport or public use airport. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with the County’s adopted emergency response plan related to Grayson Road or the project site. Thus, project impacts on emergency response would be a less than significant. The proposed access road off of Grayson Road and the additional 10 single-family residences (8 net new single-family residences) located on the proposed private access road is not expected to have any significant impact on emergency evacuation plans within the area. As described in the Public Services section, the project site is in close proximity to both the Office of the Sheriff and CCCFPD stations. The CCCFPD would review project plans prior to project approval to ensure that adequate emergency access to the proposed buildings would be adequate. Construction and operation of the proposed project would not interfere with access to Grayson Road, which would be the project area’s most likely evacuation route. Therefore, adjacent neighborhoods would not be impeded by the proposed project’s construction. Impacts would be less than significant. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site is currently in a developed area within the urbanized community of Contra Costa County, which is designated as an “urban unzoned” area by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (DFFP). The DFFP’s Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map’s, adopted in 2007, characterize this area as a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone area. The recently updated draft 2022 maps from the DFFP now characterize the site as in a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. While the project is located in an High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the project site is located in an area that is mostly surrounded by other residential development, which reduces wildfire risks. Additionally, the proposed project would result in the removal of vegetation across the vacant site, further reducing the risk of wildfires. The proposed project would be designed and managed according to regulations provided in the County Ordinance 2019-37, the CCCFPD Ordinance, which would include design standards and management regulations, such as weed abatement and brush clearance regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. Compliance with these regulations, as well as the proposed project design and vegetation removal, the proposed project would have not result in the exposure of people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. Impacts would be less than significant. Sources of Information • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). 2009. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA Map. • Contra Costa County, 2000. Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Transportation and Circulation Element. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? SUMMARY: a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would comply with applicable water quality and discharge requirements. Contra Costa County, the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and 16 incorporated cities in the county have formed the Contra Costa Clean Water Program. In 2015, the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region (RWQCB) adopted the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP Order No. R2-2015- 0049) for the Program, which regulates discharges from municipal storm drains. Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit places requirements on site design to minimize creation of impervious surfaces and control stormwater runoff. The County has the authority to enforce compliance with its Municipal Regional Permit through the County’s adopted C.3 requirements. The C.3 requirements stipulate that projects creating and/or redeveloping at least 5,000 square feet of impervious surface shall treat stormwater runoff with permanent stormwater management facilities, along with measures to control runoff rates and volumes. The proposed project would add an estimated 50,825 square feet of new impervious surface area. The C.3 requirements stipulate that projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface must incorporate specific measures to reduce runoff, such as dispersion of runoff to vegetated areas, use of pervious pavement, installation of cisterns, and installation of bioretention facilities or planter boxes. Implementation of these measures would be required as a condition of approval. Design of the new project will include the installation of a single C3 compliant low impact development (LID) flowthrough treatment planter to act as a source control, treating all replaced impervious surfaces prior to connecting to the public storm drain system. No direct storm water discharge would be placed within Grayson Creek. All storm water would be metered and cleaned by the C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter. With implementation of the practicable stormwater controls, the project would be compliant with applicable water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, resulting in a less than significant impact. b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? (Less Than Significant Impact) The site is in the water service area from the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). After construction of the new residence, water service to the building would be provided by EBMUD. Since any future water service at the site will be provided by EBMUD, no groundwater wells will be required. The design of the C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter would maintain existing ground water recharging that currently occurs on the site resulting in a less than significant impact. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the area or change the course of Grayson Creek. In the preliminary stormwater review, the grading pattern of the property will follow the existing drainage pattern and will ultimately connect to an existing drainage located along the northeast side of the project site after the water is detained and treated in a C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter. Accordingly, the proposed project would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the site or area or result in substantial erosion or siltation. The additional impervious surface flows will be directed to a single C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter to act as a source control, treating all replaced impervious surfaces prior to connecting to the public storm drain system. No direct storm water discharge would be placed within Grayson Creek. All storm water would be metered and cleaned by the C3 compliant LID flowthrough treatment planter, prior to the indirect discharge into Grayson Creek. With implementation of the practicable stormwater controls, the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation, resulting in a less than significant impact. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Less Than Significant Impact) As described previously, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area nor would it substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff. Thus, the project would not result in any significant impacts associated with an increase in the volume of runoff that would result in onsite or off-site flooding. iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site includes 3.05 acres of gently sloping terrain adjacent to an existing creek (Grayson Creek). Higher elevations along the westerly boundary are at approximate elevation of 116 feet (local datum) and 110 along Grayson Road. The site slopes southeasterly to Grayson Creek with top of bank elevations at approximately 90 feet, with creek waterlines around elevation 80. Grayson Creek drains northeasterly along the project’s boundary. An existing 24” reenforced concrete pipe within Grayson Road currently collects stormwater runoff from upstream properties. The 24” storm drain pipe connects to 2 6x6 concrete boxes under Grayson Creek and discharges water directly to Grayson Creek. The project will connect into the existing 24” storm drain pipe within Grayson Road, just to the east of storm drain man hole (SDMH) #32. The existing 24” storm drain pipe will remain undisturbed by development of the site. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24-inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff. This would ensure that project runoff would not exceed existing conditions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be necessary. iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? (Less Than Significant Impact) As described above, Grayson Creek, which runs through portions of the project site, is in a FEMA Flood Zone A, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annual-chance flood event. With construction of the proposed project, the runoff rate at the project site would increase by 41.2 percent without stormwater detention. Given this volume of stormwater, a 555-cubic-foot detention basin would be required by the County. However, most runoff on the project site would be directed to a 674-cubic-foot bioretention basin located adjacent to Lot 2 for treatment. Once treated, runoff would be directed to the public storm drainpipe beneath Grayson Road. A portion of the runoff would bypass this treatment system and instead enter the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road. According to the Hydrology and Stormwater Detention Report, the 24-inch pipe has adequate capacity to capture this amount of stormwater runoff, even in a 100-year storm event. This would put the proposed project in compliance with the CCCWP, which requires that runoff be reduced to at or below existing conditions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? (Less Than Significant Impact) According to Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 06013C0280G, all of the proposed improvements from the project are located in area that is outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area. Additionally, as discussed above, the proposed project would utilize a bioretention basin with capacity beyond what is required, as well as the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road to treat storm waters. The proposed stormwater treatment system would have adequate capacity for a 100-year storm event. The proposed project would not be susceptible to inundation by seiche or tsunami. The California Geological Survey (2009) has projected and mapped the tsunami hazard posed by a tidal wave that passes through the Golden Gate and into San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay and Carquinez Strait. The project site is not included in the inundation area on any tsunami hazard map. e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? (Less Than Significant Impact) As stated above, the proposed project would comply with applicable water quality and discharge requirements and will not install or utilize any groundwater wells on the Project site. Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit places requirements on site design to minimize creation of impervious surfaces and control stormwater runoff. Thus the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), effective January 1, 2015, established a framework of priorities and requirements to facilitate sustainable groundwater management throughout the State. The intent of SGMA is for groundwater to be managed by local public agencies and newly-formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to ensure a groundwater basin is operated within its sustainable yield through the development and implementation of a Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP). The project is located near the San Ramon Valley and Ygnacio Valley Basins, both of which are Very Low Priority groundwater basins based on the Groundwater Basin Prioritization by the State Department of Water Resources (DWR). No sustainable groundwater management plan has been prepared for the basins due to their low priority status. Sources of Information • California Department of Water Resources. https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Groundwater-Management • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). National Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-flood-hazard- mapping. • Debolt Civil Engineering. 2021. Preliminary Hydrology and Storm Water Detention Report for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road SD 20-9531 • Debolt Civil Engineering. 2021. Preliminary Storm Water Control Plan for 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road SD 20-9531 • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California. 11. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? SUMMARY: a) Would the project physically divide an established community? (No Impact) Development of the proposed project would not physically divide an established community. The proposed project will occur on a developed parcel within a residential portion of unincorporated Pleasant Hill. b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Less Than Significant Impact) General Plan The proposed project would conform to the applicable General Plan land use designation of SL, Single-Family Low Density, 1.0-2.9 units per acre. The project proposes to utilize a Density Bonus pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, under Government Code Section 65915. Conservatively calculating the Project’s density based on the net project site acreage of approximately 2.76 acres (2.76 acres x 2.9 du/ac =8.004 du), each fractional unit rounds to the next whole unit, or 9 base units pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(5). The home on Lot 1 would be restricted for-sale to a moderate-income household (12% of 9 base lots), therefore the project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions under the California Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code Section 65915, subdivision (b)(1)(D). By providing one lot of the nine base units for sale to a moderate income household, the Project qualifies for a 7% density bonus, resulting in one additional unit (9 du x.07 = 9.63, which rounds up to 10). (Gov. Code, § 65915(f)(4), (5).) The density of the proposed project would be 3.62 dwelling units per net acre, which would be deemed consistent with the SL Land Use designation density range of 1 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre as a result of the utilization of a Density Bonus. Government Code Sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) state that either granting a density bonus, concession, incentive, or waiver, “Shall not require or be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval.” This language means that the applicant’s requests made pursuant to the Density Bonus Law do not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate the additional density in the proposed project. Category Totals Total Area = 3.05 Acres Private Right-of-way = 0.29 Acres Net Area= 2.76 acres 2.76 Net Acres X 2.9 = base units 9 base units 1 moderate unit / base units= 11.11% (rounds up to 12%)2 10% moderate income density bonus= 7% Density Bonus Calculation 9 (base units) x .07= (9.63) Bonus 10 units 2 Government Code section 65915(f)(5). The County’s land use compatibility standards contained in Figure 11-6 of the Noise Element, ambient noise environments are considered normally acceptable for new single- family residential land use development with noise levels ranging up to 60 A-weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)/day/night average sound level (Ldn). Environments with noise levels from 55 dBA to70 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered conditionally acceptable for new single-family land use development; and such development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Environments with noise levels from 70 dBA to 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered normally unacceptable for new single-family land use development, and clearly unacceptable for levels above 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Two noise measurement surveys were taken to determine existing noise levels at the project site. The dominant noise source in the project vicinity was found to be traffic noise on adjacent roadways and lawnmowing. The noise survey documented that existing ambient noise levels on the project site range from 61 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq), as measured at approximately 20 feet from the edge of Grayson Road, to 47 dBA Leq at the project boundary adjoining 2043 Mohawk Drive property. The noise measurement survey files are included in the FCS Draft IS/MND report. These noise measurements were taken during the peak noise hours of the day, and represent the expected highest hourly average noise levels that are experienced on the project site. Resulting 24-hour average noise levels would be even lower when averaged with quieter hours of the day. Therefore, the existing ambient noise environment of the project site is within the conditionally acceptable range for new residential land use development. For conditionally acceptable noise environments, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems, will normally suffice. Based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels, with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for multi- family residential developments would provide 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA or more with windows open. The proposed project will include alternative ventilation systems such as mechanical air conditioning whick will allow windows to remain closed for prolonged periods of time, sufficiently reducing traffic noise levels to meet the interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 61 dBA - 25 dBA = 36 dBA). Zoning The project would be considered consistent with the R-15 Single-family zoning district as a result of the utilization of the Density Bonus, pursuant to Government Code sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5) and County Ordinance Code Section 822-2. The State Density Bonus Law provides for unlimited number of waivers of development standards in order to construct the project at the proposed density. (See Gov. Code, § 65915(b)(1), (e)(1).) Where a development standard would physically prevent the project from being built at the permitted density and with the granted concessions/incentives, the developer may propose to have those standards waived or reduced. The applicant is seeking waivers of development standards pertaining to: (a) a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1 and 4-10; (b) a reduction in the minimum lot width for Lots 1-10 (instead of 100 feet); (c) a reduction in minimum lot depth for Lot 1; (d) a reduction in minimum front yard and side yard setback and (e) a waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls. The proposed lot sizes, lot width, depth, and setbacks, are shown in Table 1 on the following page. The project is seeking these reductions and waivers as application of the required standard would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density with the proposed one moderate income unit and with the application of the available incentives, concessions, and density bonus. Finally, the project is seeking a concession to allow the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping. The project would be considered consistent with the General Plan and the R-15 Single- family zoning district as a result of the utilization of the Density Bonus, pursuant to Government Code sections 65915(j)(1) and 65915(C)(5), accordingly there is no significant impact resulting from the project. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. • DeBolt Civil Engineering, 2022. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Land Use Element. • California Government Code Section 65915 • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California Table 1 1024 & 1026 Grayson Rd. Proposed Alternative Development Standards (R-15 Standards) Lot # Area ( 15,000 Sq. Ft.) Depth (100 Ft. Min.) Average Width (100 Ft. Min.) Front Yard Setback (20 feet) Side Yard Setback (25 feet aggregate, no yard less than 10 feet) Retaining Walls 6’ or less Lot 1 7,347 87.45 84.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 2 22,460 331 67.85 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 3 15,236 270 56.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 4 14,257 144 99.01 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 5 14,713 195 75.45 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 6 11,261 163 69.09 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 7 11,360 166 68.43 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 8 13,388 185 72.37 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 9 13,655 173 78.93 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ Lot 10 14,013 220 63.70 20’ feet to face of garage; 14’ Feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0’ 12. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? SUMMARY: a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (No Impact) Known mineral resource areas in the County are shown on Figure 8-4 (Mineral Resource Areas) of the General Plan Conservation Element. No known mineral resources have been identified in the project vicinity, and therefore the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resource. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (No Impact) The project site is not within an area of known mineral importance according to the Conservation Element of the General Plan, and therefore, the project would not impact any mineral resource recovery site. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020, Conservation Element. 13. NOISE – Would the project result in: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land 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? SUMMARY: a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?(Less Than Significant Impact) Activities at the future 10-lot subdivision are not expected to expose persons to, or generate, noise levels in excess of the Community Noise Exposure Levels shown on Figure 11-6 of the General Plan Noise Element. Figure 11-6 shows that levels of 60 dB or less are normally acceptable and noise levels between 60 dB to 70 dB are conditionally acceptable in residential areas. Types and levels of noise generated from the residential uses associated with the future residence would be similar to noise levels from the existing residential developments in the area. Thus, project noise impacts to the existing surrounding land uses would be less than significant. Furthermore, the Noise Element of the General Plan establishes the following noise policies that may be applicable to the project. Policy 11-1 New projects shall be required to meet acceptable exterior noise level standards as established in the Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines contained in Figure 11-6 [of the Noise Element]. These guidelines, along with the future noise levels shown in the future noise contours maps, should be used by the County as a guide for evaluating the compatibility of “noise-sensitive” projects in potentially noisy areas. Policy 11-2 The standard for outdoor noise levels in residential areas is an Ldn of 60 dB. However, an Ldn of 60 dB or less may not be achievable in all residential areas due to economic or aesthetic constraints. One example is small balconies associated with multi-family housing. In this case, second and third story balconies may be difficult to control to the goal. A common outdoor use area that meets the goal can be provided as an alternative. Policy 11-8 Construction activities shall be concentrated during the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of scrapers, dozers, water trucks, haul trucks, and pickup trucks. The maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from this equipment. Each dozer would also generate 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by graders is approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. A characteristic of sound is that each doubling of sound sources with equal strength increases a sound level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance from the other equipment, a reasonable worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the acoustic center of a construction area. The effect on sensitive receptors is evaluated below. The closest noise-sensitive receptors to the proposed project site are single-family residences located directly east of the project site. The calculated reasonable worst-case noise levels could result in hourly average noise levels of up to 80 dBA Leq, at the façade of the nearest receiving residential land use when equipment operate at the nearest project boundary for a full hour. However, these reasonable worst-case construction noise levels would occur only periodically throughout the day as construction equipment operate along the nearest project boundaries. Additionally, these noise levels would drop off at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance as the equipment moves over the project site. Based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels, with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for residential developments would provide a minimum of 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed. During the calculated loudest phase of construction described above the interior noise levels of the nearest off-site residences would be reduced to below 55 dBA Leq, which would not be considered a substantial noise impact for daytime noise levels. The County of Contra Costa restricts construction activities to the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. Therefore, restricting construction activity to daytime hours, as well as implementing the best management noise reduction techniques and practices outlined in Mitigation Measure Noise 1, would ensure that construction noise would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels that would result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure Noise 1, temporary construction noise impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Noise 1: To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: • The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. • At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. • The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. • The construction contractor shall limit noise producing construction activities to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturday. No such activities shall be permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. As shown in the analysis by FCS, the calculated reasonable worst-case operational noise levels from proposed mechanical ventilation equipment operations would not exceed existing measured ambient noise levels in the project area, and would therefore not result in a substantial permanent increase in noise levels in excess of established standards. Therefore, the impact of mechanical ventilation equipment operational noise levels on off-site sensitive receptors would be less than significant. A significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in traffic noise levels compared with traffic noise levels existing without the project. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. A change of 5 dBA is considered the minimum readily perceptible change to the human ear in outdoor environments. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, an increase of 5 dBA or greater above existing noise levels would be considered a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels. Another characteristic of noise is that a doubling of sound sources with equal strength is required to result in a perceptible increase (defined to be a 3 dBA or greater) in noise levels. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak period trip generation rates for single-family dwelling residences estimate of 1.0 trip per dwelling unit. The proposed project would develop 10 single-family residences, meaning it would generate an additional 10 AM and 8 PM new peak period trips. These peak-hour trips would not double the existing peak-hour or daily average traffic volumes on Grayson Road adjacent to the project site. As a result, the proposed project would not result in even a 3 dBA increase in traffic noise levels along any roadway segment in the project vicinity, and any increase would be well below the 5 dBA increase that would be considered substantial. Therefore, impacts from project-related traffic noise levels would not result in a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels in excess of applicable standards, and the impact would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Less than Significant) Project construction would not include any components (e.g. pile-driving) that would generate excessive groundborne vibration levels. Thus, project noise impacts associated with groundborne vibration would be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land 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? (No Impact) As discussed in Section 9.e, the project site is not within an airport influence area, not within an airport safety zone, and outside of the 55-60 dB CNEL airport noise contour. Thus, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from an airport use. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020, Noise Element. • Contra Costa County, 2000. Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California 14. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? SUMMARY: a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Less Than Significant) According to the California Department of Finance (CDF), the County’s estimated population as of January 1, 2022 was approximately 1,156,555. The unincorporated area of the County had an estimated population of 176,941 as of January 1, 2022. The County has an average of 2.79 persons per household as of January 2022. The proposed project would result in the development of eight additional single-family residences (net), which would directly increase the unincorporated Pleasant Hill area population by an estimated 28 persons, based on the Census 2010 estimate of 2.79 people per household for Contra Costa County. The development is limited to the project site, and would not be expected to lead to indirect population growth. Further, due to its small scope and size (less than .02% of the estimated annual population growth for the unincorporated County), the project would have a less than significant impact on population growth in the area. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Less Than Significant) The project site is currently occupied by two unoccupied single-family residences which would be demolished, and the proposed project is expected to result in the construction of ten new single family residences (eight net). Therefore, the project would have no impact on housing displacement. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County, Census 2010. Accessed June 6, 2019. http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/counties/ContraCostaCounty.htm 15. PUBLIC SERVICES – 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: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Fire Protection? b) Police Protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? SUMMARY: 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: a) Fire Protection? (Less Than Significant Impact) Fire protection services for the County are provided by the CCCFPD, which has 36 stations serving the County, including two stations within two miles of the project site. The nearest station to the project site is located at Station 5 at 205 Boyd Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.72 miles from the project site. The expected time of travel from Station 5 to the project site is approximately 4 to 5 minutes. Another fire station, Station 2, is located at 2012 Geary Road in the City of Pleasant Hill, approximately 1.74 miles south of the project site. In 2018, the CCCFPD had an average response time of 5 minutes and 35 seconds, which is above the target total response time of 5 minutes set by the County’s General Plan. According to the General Plan Goal 7-Y, upgrades to facilities and staff are regularly reviewed for the CCCFPD to achieve the target response time. As described in Section 2.14 Population and Housing, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 28 new residents in the County. This is less than a 0.02 percent increase in population growth for unincorporated areas of the County. The proposed project would add less than 0.01 percent to the total population and would therefore have a negligible impact on the CCCFPD’s ability to provide adequate fire protection and emergency medical services to its service area. The proposed project would also be reviewed by the County Fire Marshall for compliance with Title 7, Division 722 of the Ordinance Code, also known as the County’s Fire Code. The proposed project would also submit applicable fire prevention fees required by CCCFPD Ordinance 2021-18. As such, impacts from the proposed project to fire protection services would be less than significant. b) Police Protection? (Less Than Significant Impact) Law enforcement services are provided by the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff. The Office of the Sheriff serves over 1.1 million residents throughout the County, including the 164,000 residents from unincorporated areas. In 2021, the Office of the Sheriff received over 381,605 calls for service, of which nearly 78,223 were 911 calls. The Muir Station, which serves the project site is located at 1980 Muir Road in the City of Martinez, approximately 2.94 miles north of the project site. Muir Station is staffed by one Lieutenant, five Sergeants, 23 Deputies, one Community Service Officer, one Crime Prevention Specialist, and three volunteers. The Office of the Sheriff aims to have a maximum response time goal for priority 1 or 2 calls of five minutes for 90 percent of all emergency responses in central business district, urban and suburban areas. As described in Section 2.14 Population and Housing, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 28 new residents in the County, which is less than a 0.003 percent increase above the 1.1 million people currently served by the Office of the Sheriff. Other General Plan Public Protection Policies 7-57 through to 7-61 would prevent future growth that exceeds the community capability to provide police services. For example, Policy 7-57 required a Sheriff facility standard of 155 square feet of station area per 1,000 population. Additionally, all future developments, including the proposed project, are required to pay Land Development Fees in relation to police protection services. As such impacts from the proposed project to police protection services would be less than significant. c) Schools? (Less Than Significant Impact) The Mount Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) currently serves the project area, in addition to the Cities of Clayton, Concord, Pleasant Hill, Pittsburg, Walnut Creek, portions of the City of Martinez and the unincorporated communities of Bay Point, Lafayette, and Pacheco. In 2021, the MDUSD enrolled 29,582 students. The County has approximately 22.2 percent of its population under the age of 18. The nearest schools to the project site include: • Strandwood Elementary School, located approximately 1.05 miles east of the project site; • Pleasant Hill Middle School, located approximately 1.68 miles southeast of the project site; and • College Park High School located approximately 1.62 miles northeast of the project site. As noted above, the proposed project includes the development of 10 single-family residential housing units, which would result in approximately 28 new residents to the County and a direct impact to the local school population. As described above, approximately 22.2 percent of the County is under the age of 18. Therefore, we can estimate that the proposed project would result in approximately six new students in the MDUSD, resulting in a negligible increase of approximately 0.02 percent in MDUSD’s 29,582 student population. In addition, the MDUSD regularly reviews its capacity and staffing with the County Office of Education to meet the demands of the communities it services. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate a significant demand for new or expanded school facilities, and the impacts would be less than significant. d) Parks? (Less Than Significant Impact) The nearest park facilities to the project site include Rodgers-Smith Park, Pinewood Park, Shannon Hills Park, Brookwood Park, and Dinosaur Hill Park, all of which are located within 1 mile of the project site and serviced by the Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District. The Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District served a population of approximately 41,241 as of 2019 and is expecting to observe an increased demand in parks to 46,688 people in 2032, a total increase of 5,447 people. In addition, portions of Briones Regional Park are within 1 mile of the project site. Briones Regional Park is serviced by the East Bay Regional Park District. The East Bay Regional Park District serves Alameda and Contra Costa counties, which represent a combined population of 2,809,969. The proposed project would generate approximately 28 new residents to the unincorporated area around the project site. Parks in the surrounding area would be directly impacted by the additional demand generated by the proposed project’s residents. As noted above, there are multiple parks within a 1-mile radius of the project site, served by the Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District (Park District). As described above, the Park District served a population of approximately 41,241 in 2019 and is expecting to observe an increased demand in parks to 46,688 people in 2032, a total increase of 5,447 people. Therefore, the demand that would be generated by 28 residents from the proposed project would be accounted for by the Park District. The project site is also within a mile of Briones Regional Park, which is maintained by the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD). The EBRPD serves Alameda and Contra Costa counties, which represents a combined population of 2,809,969. In addition, the EBRPD Master Plan recorded a growth in visitors of 4.6 percent in Alameda County and 10.6 percent in Contra Costa County from 2000 to 2010, and thus projected further park visitors as a management goal for the future. As such, existing park services would be able to serve the residents of the proposed project and the proposed project would not result in the need for new park facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e) Other public facilities? (Less Than Significant Impact) Impacts to other public facilities, such as hospitals and libraries are usually caused by substantial increases in population. Implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to induce population growth since only eight (net) new residence would result from project approval. The project is not anticipated to create substantial additional service demands besides those which have been preliminarily reviewed by various agencies of Contra Costa County, or result in adverse physical impacts associated with the delivery of fire, police, schools, parks, or other public services. Other public facilities such as libraries would be marginally impacted by the proposed project’s generation of approximately 28 new residents. Library services to the County are provided by the Contra Costa County Library, which provides services to the project site through the Pleasant Hill branch on 2 Monticello Avenue, approximately 1.7 miles from the project site. The library system currently has approximately 350,000 active users. In addition, the proposed project is consistent with its SL–Low land use designation, and the population increase of 28 persons is considered planned growth per the County’s General Plan Housing Element. The Contra Costa County Library Strategic Plan states its intent, under Goal 1, Objective D, to increase the number of active users in the library system by 10 percent annually, which given the current userbase of would be an increase of approximately 35,000 users. Therefore, the increase of potential users from the proposed project’s 28 expected new residents would already be accounted for by the Contra Costa County Library. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. January 30, 20202. Agency Comment Letter. 16. RECREATION Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? SUMMARY: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Less Than Significant Impact) Major park facilities in the County are owned by the federal and State governments, along with an extensive system owned and operated by the EBRPD, as well as water district watershed recreation facilities. The General Plan Open Space Element Table 9- 1, County Park Criteria, identifies a service standard of 2.50 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks and 1.50 acres per 1,000 population for community parks. Though the project site is in the unincorporated County, it is within the Park District. The Park District is a Special District separate from the City of Pleasant Hill and other governments and governed under the Public Resources Code of the State of California and serves over 40,000 people. The Park District consists of 13 parks encompassing 126 acres as well as developed and undeveloped open space encompassing 115 acres. Park District facilities within 1 mile of the project site are listed below. The park nearest the project site is Rodgers-Smith Park, located approximately 0.41 mile to the east. • Rodgers-Smith Park–730 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA • Rodger’s Ranch Heritage Center–315 Cortsen Road, Pleasant Hill, CA • Dinosaur Hill Park–901 Taylor Boulevard Pleasant Hill, CA • Brookwood Park–3250 Withers Avenue Lafayette, CA • Pinewood Park–Monti Circle, Pleasant Hill, CA • Shannon Hills Park–202 Devon Avenue, Pleasant Hill, CA • Winslow Center–2590 Pleasant Hill Rd, Pleasant Hill, CA Additionally, the project site is located approximately 0.81 mile east of the eastern boundary of Briones Regional Park. Briones Regional Park is a 6,256-acre regional park offering hiking, biking, horseback riding trails as well as bird watching, picnicking, archery range, group camping and other recreational activities. Briones Regional Park is managed by the EBRPD. The proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 28 new residents to the County, which would only slightly increase demand for existing park and recreation facilities in the vicinity of the project site. However, the project applicant would be required to pay the required park dedication and park impact fees collected to fund the acquisition and development of parks in the County to serve unincorporated County residents. Thus, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Less Than Significant Impact) Given the proximity of nearby parks, the new residents would likely use these nearby facilities. As described above, use of these public recreational facilities by the residents of the new dwelling units would incrementally increase use of the facilities, but would not be expected to result in the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. 17. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? SUMMARY: a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? (Less Than Significant Impact) Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan requires a traffic impact analysis of any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak period trip generation rates of 1.0 trip per dwelling unit for single-family residences, the proposed project consisting of the ten-lot subdivision, and the future construction of 10 single-family residence (8 net new units) would generate an additional eight AM and eight PM new peak period trips, and therefore, is not required to have a project-specific traffic impact analysis. Since the project would yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, the proposed project would not conflict with the circulation system in the Pleasant Hill area. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right of way for each category of users be incorporated into all planning, funding, design, approval, and implementation processes for any construction, reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, operations, alteration, or repair of streets (including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system). Projects may seek exemptions from the policy based upon 4 potential exemptions outlined in Section C.1 of the policy. Specifically, this project has sought the exemption provided for in C.1(2): “inclusion of Complete Streets design principles would result in a disproportionate cost to the project.” The proposed subdivision project includes a new 28-foot wide access road which would permit two 10-foot travel lanes and an 8-foot wide parking on one side of the street. Additionally a 5-foot wide, monolithic, elevated sidewalk would be constructed adjacent to the new road to provide access for pedestrians and persons with disabilities within the project. Along the project frontage, the project will provide a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping in-lieu of complete frontage improvements. Improved frontage improvements are defined as curb, gutter pan, and a sidewalk. No complete frontage improvements exist along the southern portion of Grayson Road, from the intersection of Reliez Valley Road to the west and Heritage Hills Drive to the East (that road segment is in is in excess of 2,000 feet in length). Complete frontage improvements would be prohibitively expensive given the length of the project frontage (354 feet), the required grading, tree removal, and utility requirements. In addition, there is no sidewalk along the southern side of Grayson Road to connect with, in 1,000 feet in either direction. The adjacent properties that front along Grayson Road are not expected to develop in the future. Finally, existing Grayson Road has adequate width to support two travel lanes, parking, and a bike lane. Therefore the overall the surrounding circulation system is consistent with the Complete Streets policy and qualifies for an exemption as outlined in Section C.1(2) of the Policy. Moreover, the Density Bonus law provides for regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs. (Gov. Code § 65915(d)(1)). The Density Bonus Law puts the burden of rejecting any proposed incentives or concessions on the County and requires the County to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the County makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions; (B) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households; (C) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. The Density Bonus application submitted to the County has requested that the installation of the complete frontage improvements be omitted in lieu of a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle lane striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)? (Less Than Significant Impact) The California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) establishes criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts. Vehicle Miles Traveled (“VMT”) is the metric for measuring transportation impacts. The County adopted Transportation Analysis Guidelines (2020) providing technical assistance, thresholds of significance and mitigation measures for land development projects. Per County guidelines, projects of 20 residential units or less should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA. The project proposes 10 (eight net) residential units which is under the County guidelines VMT screening criteria threshold. Therefore, the project should be considered to have a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and would not require a VMT analysis. c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (Less Than Significant Impact) According to the project’s Civil Engineer, the center line of the proposed project’s access road from Grayson Road is located approximately 164 feet to the east of the existing Golf Links Street (located to the north) and 280-feet to the west of the existing Buttner road (located to the north east). Both of these roads are minor roads with low vehicle counts that have no through connections and serve only the single-family homes located directly on them. The proposed new access road is located in excess of 150 feet of either center line of Buttner and Golf Links roads, consistent with ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) recommendations for intersection separation on 35 MPH streets, such as Grayson Road. In addition, cars traveling either eastbound or westbound on Grayson road have over 500- feet of sight distance, which is more than adequate to provide for adequate stopping time on the 35 MPH designated Grayson road. Thus, the project would result in a less than significant impact due to design features or incompatible uses. d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project is located in an urban residential neighborhood with available emergency services provided by the County Sheriff’s Department and Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. Furthermore, prior to the County review of construction drawings for building permits, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District would review the construction drawings and ensure that adequate emergency access to buildings on the project site could be provided. Thus, a less than significant impact is expected due to emergency access. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County Code, Title 8, Zoning Ordinance. • Contra Costa County, July 12, 2016. Complete Streets Policy • Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development, Transportation Division, March 26 2021. Comment Letter • DeBolt Civil Engineering, March 26 2021. Vesting Tentative Map, SD 20-9531. (Project Plans) • DeBolt Civil Engineering, June 8, 2020. Response to Comments Letter to Joseph Lawlor • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Land Use Element. • California Government Code Section 65915 18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? SUMMARY: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations) As discussed in Sections 5.a through 5.c above, no historical resources are known to exist on the project site. On February 5, 2007, Suzanne Baker of Archaeological/ Historical Consultants conducted an on-foot archaeological reconnaissance of the project area. No prehistoric or historic (over 50 years of age) archaeological sites or materials were found on-site during the course of reconnaissance. Further, according to the County’s Archaeological Sensitivities map, Figure 9-2, of the County General Plan, the subject site is located in an area that is considered “largely urbanized,” and is generally not considered to be a location with significant archaeological resources. Given all of these factors, there is little potential for the project to impact tribal cultural resources on the site. Pertaining to the significance of tribal cultural resources, there are no onsite historical resources, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k ) that are included in a local register of historic resources. Nevertheless, the expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures Cultural Resources 1 and Cultural Resources 2 would reduce the impact on tribal cultural resources during project related work to a level that would be considered less than significant. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations) As discussed in Sections 5.a through 5.c above, no historical resources are likely to exist on the project site. Further, according to the County’s Archaeological Sensitivities map, Figure 9-2, of the County General Plan, the subject site is located in an area that is considered “largely urbanized,” and is not considered to be a location with significant archaeological resources. Thus, there is little potential for the project to impact tribal cultural resources on the site. It is not likely that the project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that meets the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, for the reasons stated above. Nevertheless, the expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1 and Cultural Resources 2 would reduce the impact on tribal cultural resources during project related work to a less than significant level. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Open Space Element. • Archaeological Survey and Historic Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Archaeological/Historical Consultants dated February 2007 19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater 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? d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? SUMMARY: a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site has been previously developed and is currently connected to wastewater, electric, gas, and telecommunication facilities. Agency comment letter received by Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), and the County Public Works Department have stated that adequate facilities would be available to accommodate the project. Thus, no significant environmental effects are expected from the construction of new facilities that would be required to provide services to the project. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site would receive water service from EBMUD. EBMUD has reviewed the project application documents regarding the provision of new water service pursuant to EBMUD water service regulations and stated that adequate water service is available. Accordingly, the impact of providing water service to the proposed project would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater 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? (Less Than Significant Impact) The project site is already serviced by Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. The district has provided comments stating that the project’s addition of eight (net) new single family homes would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity demand on the wastewater system. As proposed, the project would not result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would generate construction solid waste and post-construction operational solid waste. Construction waste would be hauled to one of the recycling centers and/or transfer stations located in the area. The recycling center and/or transfer station would sort through the material and pull out recyclable materials. Future construction of the proposed project would incrementally add to the construction waste headed to a landfill; however, the impact of the project-related incremental increase would be considered to be less than significant. Furthermore, construction on the project site would be subject to the CalGreen Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Program administered by the CDD at the time of application for a building permit. The Debris Recovery Program would reduce the construction debris headed to the landfill by diverting materials that could be recycled to appropriate recycling facilities. With respect to residential waste, the receiving landfill for operational waste is Keller Canyon, located at 901 Bailey Road in Bay Point. Keller Canyon is estimated to be at 15 percent of capacity. Residential waste from, the expected one new dwelling unit would incrementally add to the operational waste headed to the landfill; however, the impact of the project-related residential waste is considered to be less than significant. As is the case with construction debris, a portion of the residential waste is expected to be recycled, and would thereby reduce the residential waste headed to the landfill. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (Less Than Significant Impact) The proposed project would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws related to solid waste. The project includes residential land uses that would not result in the generation of unique types of solid waste that would conflict with existing regulations applicable to solid waste. Sources of Information • Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. Public Facilities Element • East Bay Municipal Utility District, February 10, 2020. Comment Letter • Central Contra Costa Sanitary District February 6, 2020. Comment Letter • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California 20. WILDFIRE – If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby, expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? SUMMARY: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Less than Significant) As discussed in section 9.g above, the project site is in a developed area within the urbanized community of Contra Costa County, which is designated as an “urban unzoned” area by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Additionally, the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map characterizes this area as a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone area. However, newly published draft maps identify the area as located in a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. As indicated in the Public Services Section above, the proposed project would be adequately served by police and fire services. Additionally, the proposed project would comply with County General Plan Policy 7-64, which requires new development to pay fair share costs for new fire protection facilities and services. Measure 7-au also provides fire protection agencies the opportunity to review projects and submit conditions of approval for consideration to determine whether road widths, road grades and turnaround radii are adequate for emergency equipment, among other considerations. For these reasons, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to emergency response or emergency evacuation. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby, expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? (Less than Significant) As detailed previously, the project site is likely to be located within an High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The General Plan identifies the project site as being in an area with slopes of less than 26 percent degrees. Project site elevations range from approximately Elevation 165 feet in the northeast corner of the site up to approximately Elevation 187 feet along the northwest boundary, sloping toward the east and south. Furthermore, the BAAQMD monitoring stations provide wind speed data from several monitoring stations in the eastern zone of the San Francisco Bay Area. The station nearest the project site is located in Concord, CA approximately 2.88 miles northeast of the project site. The average monthly wind speed recorded at this monitoring location in 2020 ranged from 7 mph to 16 mph. Therefore, the project site would not be exposed to high winds which could exacerbate wildfire risks. Furthermore, the proposed project is surrounded by existing roads and residential development which would reduce risks associated with wildfire. The proposed project would also be required to adhere to all applicable requirements and regulations related to fire safety, including the California Fire Code and CBC. The proposed project would also be subject to the CCCFPD Ordinance, which would include design standards and management regulations, such as weed abatement and brush clearance regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. Furthermore, General Plan Measure 7-au, as discussed above, would allow fire protection agencies to review the proposed project and submit conditions of approval for consideration to determine whether the proposed structures are built in compliance with the standards of the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Fire Code, other State regulations, and local ordinances regarding the use of fire-retardant materials and detection, warning and extinguishment devices. With compliance to these aforementioned standards and regulations, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact in relation to the exposure of project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of wildfire. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? (Less than Significant) The proposed project would include the development of a new private road which would provide access to the project site from Grayson Road. As previously discussed, this new road would be approximately 28 feet wide with an 8-foot parking lane on one side and a 5-foot sidewalk along the northwest side and would comply with CCCFPD standards. Electric and natural gas utilities would be provided by PG&E and new connections to the project site would be undergrounded, minimizing potential impacts to fire risk. In addition, the proposed project would follow standards and regulations published in the CCCFPD Ordinance Code, California Fire Code, CBC, and County General Plan, as discussed above. This would remove the need for the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or result in impacts to the environment. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? (Less than Significant) The General Plan identifies the project site as being in an area with slopes of less than 26 percent degrees. As noted above, the project site elevations range from approximately Elevation 165 feet in the northeast corner of the site up to approximately Elevation 187 feet along the northwest boundary, sloping toward the east and south. Grayson Creek, which runs through portions of the project site, is in FEMA Flood Zone A, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annual-chance flood event. However, the proposed project would utilize a bioretention basin with capacity beyond what is required, as well as the existing 24-inch pipe in Grayson Road to treat flood waters such that the project site would not be subject to downslope or downstream flooding. In addition, according to the Geologic Peer Review, the nearest landslide that has occurred near the project side is approximately 500 feet south of the project site, and another landslide is mapped 600 feet south of the project site. Because of the distance of the site from mapped landslides, and the moderate slope gradients on the site, the risk of landslides impacts the project site do not appear to present a potential hazard. Landslide risks would have a less than significant impact. Therefore, impacts related downslope flooding or landslides would be less than significant. Sources of Information • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). 2018. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA Map. • First Carbon Solutions. 2023. Grayson Road Residential Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Contra Costa County, California 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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 individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? SUMMARY: a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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? As discussed in individual sections of this Initial Study, the project proposes to create ten lots on the existing two-parcel on the project site and to construction 10 (eight net) new single family homes. Thus, the project may impact the quality of the environment (Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources) but the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level with the adoption of the recommended Mitigation Measures that are specified in the respective sections of this Initial Study. The project is not expected to threaten any wildlife population, impact endangered plants or animals, or affect state cultural resources with the already identified Mitigation Measures. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) The proposed project would not create substantial cumulative impacts. The project site is located within the Urban Limit Line in an area that has been designated for single- family residential development. The proposed project would be consistent with the existing surrounding single-family residential development. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? This Initial Study has disclosed impacts that would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures. All identified Mitigation Measures would be included in the conditions of approval for the proposed project, and the applicant would be responsible for implementation of the measures. As a result, there would not be any environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. REFERENCES References used in the process of preparing the Initial Study Checklist and conduction of the evaluation are available for review at the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Rd., Martinez, CA 94553. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. MMRP Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:4,514 Notes0.10.07 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Vicinity Map City Limits Unincorporated Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Maintained Roads Water Bodies County Boundary Bay Area Counties Assessment Parcels 103 105 106 109 110107 111 113 123 104 124 153 125 126 128 129 127 133 132 131 151 150 152 156 158 164 165 166 147 148 149 146 145 143 144 141 142 140 139 136 135114115 116 130 175 176 177 178 180 184 187 188 193194 195 174 168 169 170 167 171 171B 108 112 131 G R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SFLOT8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF TOTAL UNITS: 10 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SUMMARY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT EASTON C. MCALLISTER, PE DATE UTILITIES: AT&T PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CITY OF PLEASANT HILL CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT COMCAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FPD CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT CABLE TELEVISION: TELEPHONE: SEWAGE DISPOSAL: FIRE PROTECTION: WATER SUPPLY: GAS & ELECTRIC: STORM DRAIN: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-15EXISTING ZONING: CIVIL ENGINEER: PROPOSED LAND USE: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: TOTAL AREA: SUBDIVIDER: SURVEYOR: 3.05± AC GROSS (2.76± AC NET) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO:166-030-001 & 002 PROPERTY ADDRESS: P.E. #61148 EXP 12/31/20 ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES 925-683-5493 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD DANVILLE, CA 94526 (925) 837-3780 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD DANVILLE, CA 94526 (925) 837-3780 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD PLEASANT HILL, CA 94523 CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK ON THIS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD CIVIL ENGINEERING PRACTICE. VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 01/28/22 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD CITY OF PLEASANT HILL, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FLOOD ZONE VICINITY MAP N.T.S. THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE DERIVED FROM SURFACE OBSERVATION AND ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. ACTUAL LOCATION AND SIZE, TOGETHER WITH PRESENCE OF ANY ADDITIONAL UTILITY LINES NOT SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. BLDG CONC (E)/EX ESMT FNC INV. P.U.E REBAR. () R/W SSCO SSMH SDDI (T) WM WV BUILDING CONCRETE EXISTING EASEMENT FENCE INVERT PRIVATE UTILITY EASEMENT REBAR RECORD DATA RIGHT OF WAY SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STORM DRAIN DRAIN INLET TOTAL WATER METER WATER VALVE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WATER VALVE FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED STANDARD STREET MONUMENT EASEMENT LINE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY LINE TIE LINE CENTERLINE EXISTING WATER LINE EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPE EXISTING ELECTRIC CABLE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING UTILITY NOTE: ZONE A: SPECIAL FLOOD AREA WITHOUT BASE FLOOD. ELEVATION (BFE) ZONE X: AREAS OF 0.2% CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS PROTECTED BY LEVEES FROM 1% CHANCE FLOOD. FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PANEL NUMBER 06013C0280G, DATED 03/21/2017. LEGEND: No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP DESCRIPTIONNUMBER SHEET INDEX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRIANAGE AND UTILITY PLAN HYDROLOGY AND STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN CREEK STRUCTURE SETBACK EXHIBIT TREE INVENTORY SHEET TREE INVENTORY SHEET CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LAYOUT PROPERTY OWNER:ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES 925-683-5493 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 *BUILDING SETBACKS MINIMUM SIDE YARD WIDTH SHALL BE 5' MINIMUM, 10' AGGREGATE FOR LOTS 51 FEET OR LESS IN WIDTH; 5' MINIMUM, 15' AGGREGATE FOR LOTS BETWEEN 51' AND 80' WIDTH. (COUNTY ORDINANCE SECTION 82-14.004) FRONT SETBACK:14' TO LIVING AREA 20' TO GARAGE 101 102 1 154 155 157 160 159 161 162 163 137 138 117 118 119 122 120 121 179 181 182 185 183 186 189 190 191 192 172 173 198 199 197 196 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 192A 173B 142B 138B 135A 122A G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 PAD 181.0 PAD 170.0 PAD 170.0 PAD 170.5 PAD 173.5 PAD 173.5PAD 176.5PAD 178.0 PAD 181.0 PAD 184.0 BIO 163.30 ACCESS DRIVE TYPICAL SECTION SCALE: 1"=5' A - 42' MINIMUM ESMT P/L 10' TRAVEL 8' PARKING 9.5'NEIGHBOR20' WIDE FIRE LANE 10' TRAVEL ESMT 4.5' GRAYSON ROAD FRONTAGE SCALE: 1"=5' B -PROJECTGRAYSON ROADP/L 21'± EP No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 20' VTM-2 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN PRELIMINARY GRADING, *TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE: TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SITE INLETS (EXCLUDES C.3 TREATMENT POND OUTLET STRUCTURE. G R A Y S O N R O A D No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-3 WATER CONTROL PLAN HYDROLOGY AND STORM C.3 FLOW-THROUGH PLANTER - 1 NATIVE SOIL COMPACTED @ 85% MIN R.C. 24"x24" STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN 12" DRAIN ROCK LAYER 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40 PERF PIPE; FACE PERFORATIONS DOWNWARD. 6" MIN 18" LOAMY SAND PER CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK APPENDIX B. NO LINER 3:1 MAX. RIDGE ELEV. OUT 2" MIN 40ml HDPE POND LINER OR APPROVED EQUAL FINISH GRADE GRATE ELEV. BASE ELEV. CLASS II PERMEABLE, CALTRANS SPEC. 68-1.025 LANDSCAPE PLANTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK APPENDIX B. NOTE: REFER TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK CHAPTER 4 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERS. C.3 TREATMENT SIZING CALCULATIONS DETENTION SIZING CALCULATIONS GGFFE E D D C C B B AAG R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460 ±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SF LOT 8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF TOEOFCREEKBANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK81.49CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK94.03CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.41CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.80CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK91.30CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-4 SETBACK EXHIBIT CREEK STRUCTURE No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 N.T.S. VTM-5 TREE INVENTORY ARBORIST REPORT No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 N.T.S. VTM-6 TREE INVENTORY ARBORIST REPORT G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 PLAN 1 LOT 2 PLAN 3 LOT 3 PLAN 3 LOT 4 PLAN 2 LOT 5 PLAN 1LOT 6 PLAN 3 LOT 7 PLAN 3 LOT 8 PLAN 3 LOT 9 PLAN 2 LOT 10 PLAN 3 1" = 20' VTM-7 BUILDING LAYOUT CONCEPTUAL No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 Date: Job No.: By: Scale: 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COM 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 03/25/22 EM 19300 * *-Affordable unit for Moderate Income Household Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde, (Applicant / Owner) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program County File #CDSD20-09531 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 March 2023 Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 2 of 14 SECTION 1: AESTHETICS Potential Impact: The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light -sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. Project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties and Grayson Creek Mitigation Measures: Aesthetics 1: Thirty days prior to application for a building permit for subdivision improvements, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: At least 30 days prior to applying for building permits for the new residence. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project Proponent and CDD Staff. Compliance Verification: Review and approval of construction drawings (e.g., site plan, floor plans, elevations and grading plans) by Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) staff, to verify compliance with all mitigations and conditions of approval. SECTION 2: AIR QUALITY Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures: Air Quality 1: The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 3 of 14 All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxi cs control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Implementing Action: COA Timing Verification: Prior to CDD issuance of a grading or building permit, all construction plan sets shall include Basic Construction measures. Responsible Department or Agency: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD Plan Check review of plans prior to issuance of building or grading permit, and field verification by the Building Inspection Division. Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities using diesel powered vehicles and equipment on the site could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by creating localized odors. Mitigation Measures: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures outlined in Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. SECTION 3: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: suitable habitat for special-status plants, grading activities within suitable habitat could result in direct impacts to special-status plants through habitat loss or degradation. Mitigation Measures: Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 4 of 14 Biology 1: In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to submittal of building permits and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-skinned hawk, and destrel) were present, and observed foraging on the project site. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed on the project site exhibiting nesting behaviors. Mitigation Measures: Biology 2: All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out -of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 5 of 14 protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Biology 3: If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: . CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF) in the 5-mile radius of the project site. Additionally, during the April 2021 survey, the Project Biologist identified suitable habitat for the CRLF Mitigation Measures: Biology 4: A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. Biology 5: Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre- Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 6 of 14 construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red -legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and wor k areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Five occurrences of western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) within the 5-mile radius of the project site. Water was present in Grayson Creek during the April 2021 survey. Therefore, western pond turtle could use the creek for foraging and aquatic dispersal. Mitigation Measures: Biology 4 and Biology 5 Potential Impact: Runoff from the project site could adversely affect aquatic life within the adjacent water features. Mitigation Measures: Biology 6: A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 7 of 14 Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Removal of trees would impact raptor foraging and nesting bird habitat Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 7 Biology 7: Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan and landscaping plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Mammals, such as the western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) could use large trees and existing residential buildings for roosting opportunities and foraging habitat within the site. Implementation of the project would result in the demolition of the existing residences along with 40 trees. Tree removal partnered with any project- related construction lighting would result in the disturbance of roosting bats and the loss of roosting and foraging bat habitat. Mitigation Measures: Biology 8: For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special -status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: • To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 8 of 14 work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. • Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. • If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artif,icial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Project implementation would result in removal of approximately 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland, which is considered a sensitive natural community and is an oak woodland protected under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 6, Biology 7 and Biology 9 Biology 9: During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially: Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 9 of 14 b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. Potential Impact: The proposed project plans on the removal of approximately 97 trees including native species such as coast live oak, valley oak, black walnut, and buckeye. Native trees and all trees greater than 6.5 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) are considered to be protected under the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. Mitigation Measures: Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 9. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. SECTION 4: CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5. Subsurface construction activities have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. Historic resources can include wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 10 of 14 Mitigation Measures: Cultural Resources 1: All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. Cultural Resources 2: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: 1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Implementing Action: COA Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 11 of 14 Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: Include on plan sets during plan check and submittal of archaeologist report in the event of a find, for CDD review. SECTION 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potential Impact: The project could significantly impact the potential for increased exposure to adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Mitigation Measures: Geology 1: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project geologist, peer review geologist, and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD and peer review geologist review of investigation report by project geologist. Potential Impact: There is a possibility that previously undiscovered buried fossils and other paleontological resources could be present and accidental discovery could occur. Geology 2: The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 12 of 14 deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Project proponent and CDD. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: CDD. Compliance Verification: Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map. Potential Impact: The project could be located on located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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 Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures Geology 1 would reduce the impacts of unstable soil to a less than significant level. Section 13 NOISE Potential Impact: Construction related noise could impact adjacent sensitive receptors. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 13 of 14 Noise 1: To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: • The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. • At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. • The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. • The construction contractor shall limit noise producing construction activities to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturday. No such activities shall be permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Project proponent and CDD. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: CDD. Compliance Verification: Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map. SECTION 18: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of mitigations measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 14 of 14 landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of mitigations measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. SECTION 10: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potential Impact: As discussed in individual sections of the Initial Study, the project to create two parcels from the site may impact the quality of the environment (Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources). Mitigation Measures: The impact would be reduced to a less than significant level with the adoption of the recommended Mitigation Measures that are specified in the respective sections of the Initial Study. Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde, (Applicant / Owner) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program County File #CDSD20-09531 1024 and 1026 Grayson Rd Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 March 2023 Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 2 of 14 SECTION 1: AESTHETICS Potential Impact: The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light -sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. Project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties and Grayson Creek Mitigation Measures: Aesthetics 1: Thirty days prior to application for a building permit for subdivision improvements, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: At least 30 days prior to applying for building permits for the new residence. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project Proponent and CDD Staff. Compliance Verification: Review and approval of construction drawings (e.g., site plan, floor plans, elevations and grading plans) by Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) staff, to verify compliance with all mitigations and conditions of approval. SECTION 2: AIR QUALITY Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures: Air Quality 1: The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 3 of 14 All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxi cs control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Implementing Action: COA Timing Verification: Prior to CDD issuance of a grading or building permit, all construction plan sets shall include Basic Construction measures. Responsible Department or Agency: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD Plan Check review of plans prior to issuance of building or grading permit, and field verification by the Building Inspection Division. Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities using diesel powered vehicles and equipment on the site could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by creating localized odors. Mitigation Measures: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures outlined in Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1 would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. SECTION 3: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: suitable habitat for special-status plants, grading activities within suitable habitat could result in direct impacts to special-status plants through habitat loss or degradation. Mitigation Measures: Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 4 of 14 Biology 1: In the spring immediately prior to project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). If determined to be necessary by the qualified Botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If State or federally listed plants are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to submittal of building permits and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-skinned hawk, and destrel) were present, and observed foraging on the project site. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed on the project site exhibiting nesting behaviors. Mitigation Measures: Biology 2: All trees removed from the on-site riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out -of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with approximately 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with approximately 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long- term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 5 of 14 protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Biology 3: If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified Biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified Biologist during project-related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. If any change in bird behavior is detected, active nest buffers will increase as determined by a qualified Biologist. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in project activities of seven days or more. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: . CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF) in the 5-mile radius of the project site. Additionally, during the April 2021 survey, the Project Biologist identified suitable habitat for the CRLF Mitigation Measures: Biology 4: A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site prior to construction. Biology 5: Directed pre-construction surveys for the California red-legged frog (CRLF) shall be performed prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre- Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 6 of 14 construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. In order to mitigate for potential impacts to California red -legged frog (CRLF) and western pond turtle, wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) shall be installed along the grading limit of the project site to prevent dispersal into the grading and wor k areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground bat a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be on-site during initial ground-disturbing activities to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special-status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Five occurrences of western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) within the 5-mile radius of the project site. Water was present in Grayson Creek during the April 2021 survey. Therefore, western pond turtle could use the creek for foraging and aquatic dispersal. Mitigation Measures: Biology 4 and Biology 5 Potential Impact: Runoff from the project site could adversely affect aquatic life within the adjacent water features. Mitigation Measures: Biology 6: A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shall be designed to ensure that best management practices (BMPs) are implemented so there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or postconstruction storm water run-off. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 7 of 14 Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Removal of trees would impact raptor foraging and nesting bird habitat Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 7 Biology 7: Vegetation planted within on-site undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species to the greatest extent practicable. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan and landscaping plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Mammals, such as the western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) could use large trees and existing residential buildings for roosting opportunities and foraging habitat within the site. Implementation of the project would result in the demolition of the existing residences along with 40 trees. Tree removal partnered with any project- related construction lighting would result in the disturbance of roosting bats and the loss of roosting and foraging bat habitat. Mitigation Measures: Biology 8: For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special -status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: • To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 8 of 14 work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. • Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. • If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artif,icial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. Potential Impact: Project implementation would result in removal of approximately 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland, which is considered a sensitive natural community and is an oak woodland protected under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure Biology 2, Biology 6, Biology 7 and Biology 9 Biology 9: During project implementation, the applicant shall implement the following Tree Preservation Guidelines, as detailed in the Revised Arborist Report Dated May 6, 2020 prepared by Traverso Tree Service, specially: Pre- Grading Phase a. Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. b. Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. c. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. d. TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase a. The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 9 of 14 b. Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. c. If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. d. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. e. Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. f. Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. g. Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project Arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase a. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. b. Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. c. Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. d. Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. e. All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. Potential Impact: The proposed project plans on the removal of approximately 97 trees including native species such as coast live oak, valley oak, black walnut, and buckeye. Native trees and all trees greater than 6.5 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) are considered to be protected under the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. Mitigation Measures: Biology 2, Biology 3, and Biology 9. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD review. SECTION 4: CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5. Subsurface construction activities have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. Historic resources can include wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 10 of 14 Mitigation Measures: Cultural Resources 1: All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. Cultural Resources 2: In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: 1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Implementing Action: COA Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 11 of 14 Timing of Verification: During initial review of construction plan sets and throughout project. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent and CDD. Compliance Verification: Include on plan sets during plan check and submittal of archaeologist report in the event of a find, for CDD review. SECTION 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potential Impact: The project could significantly impact the potential for increased exposure to adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Mitigation Measures: Geology 1: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project geologist, peer review geologist, and CDD. Compliance Verification: CDD and peer review geologist review of investigation report by project geologist. Potential Impact: There is a possibility that previously undiscovered buried fossils and other paleontological resources could be present and accidental discovery could occur. Geology 2: The project applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 12 of 14 deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Project proponent and CDD. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: CDD. Compliance Verification: Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map. Potential Impact: The project could be located on located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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 Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures Geology 1 would reduce the impacts of unstable soil to a less than significant level. Section 13 NOISE Potential Impact: Construction related noise could impact adjacent sensitive receptors. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 13 of 14 Noise 1: To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following multi-part mitigation measure shall be implemented for the proposed project: • The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. • At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. • The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. • The construction contractor shall limit noise producing construction activities to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturday. No such activities shall be permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Project proponent and CDD. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: CDD. Compliance Verification: Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map. SECTION 18: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of mitigations measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD20-09531 Community Development Division (CDD) Page 14 of 14 landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of mitigations measure Cultural Resources 1 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. SECTION 10: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potential Impact: As discussed in individual sections of the Initial Study, the project to create two parcels from the site may impact the quality of the environment (Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources). Mitigation Measures: The impact would be reduced to a less than significant level with the adoption of the recommended Mitigation Measures that are specified in the respective sections of the Initial Study. April 24, 2023 Joseph W. Lawlor Jr. Community Development Division Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us Re: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, County File #CDSD20-09531 Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (Revised) Comments submitted via email Dear Mr. Lawlor, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project and revised mitigated negative declaration (MND). As you are aware from previous communications, my mother Jeanne Shikany lives on Iroquois Drive in the neighborhood south of this project, and will be impacted by elements of the project such as noise, traffic, and the loss of the rural character her neighborhood and surrounding area enjoys. I write on her behalf, as well as my own. In addition to impacting the Mohawk and Iroquois Drive neighborhood, the proposed project will have both local and regional natural resource impacts, including but not limited to wildlife, habitat, and water quality impacts. Please be informed that in an email dated May 8, 2022, that I wrote on behalf of my mother and myself, I speciﬁcally requested that she be notiﬁed of any activities regarding this project. While I was notiﬁed by mail, she never received any notiﬁcation from the County. The County is required to provide adequate notice to anyone requesting it, and failed to do so in the case of my mother. Further, the MND that is published for public review is incomplete. It lacks copies of the various reports prepared to address the impacts of this project, including the addendum to the previous biological assessment, thereby limiting the public’s ability to review and comment on the project and the MND. While I am aware the public can request copies of these reports, that does not excuse the County from fulﬁlling their legal responsibility to properly circulate a complete MND that includes supporting documentation in order to facilitate meaningful public and agency input. The County previously considered a proposal to develop this property during approximately 2007 to 2009. The proposal was brought forward by the previous property owners, the children of the the longtime property owners who had passed away. Their goal, according to letters they provided to the neighbors notifying them of their proposed project, was to create lots consistent with the neighborhood while promoting privacy by limiting adjoining rear yards with existing neighbors and minimizing tree removal. They originally proposed creation of six lots, but reduced that number to ﬁve to reduce impacts to the riparian habitat and to allow sufficient area for tree replacement. The previous property owners had the courtesy to reach out to the owners of neighboring properties about their development plans at least twice, and apparently considered neighborhood concerns, the community character, and habitat values in their development proposal which proposed a much more reasonable density than what is currently be proposed. The developer of the current project has not contacted any of the neighbors regarding his plans to my knowledge. This lack of communication is particularly unsavory due to the fact Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 2 18 that compared to the previous project, the current project includes twice the number of lots; includes setback waivers, lot size waivers, and a moderate income home, all for the purpose of facilitating a maximum density development on a lot that contains substantial sensitive habitat and wildlife; is completely out of character for the surrounding area; and results in signiﬁcantly more tree and habitat removal with no area for tree replacement and habitat restoration despite the requirement to replace all removed trees. Although neighborhood outreach may not be speciﬁcally required, it is certainly the courteous and honorable thing to do when undertaking a project of this size and with the signiﬁcant impacts of this project. The developer is well aware by now that the neighbors have legitimate concerns, yet he still chose to conduct no outreach. It appears that there are no changes to the design of this project from the initial MND circulation, and that neighborhood concerns regarding the project design have been ignored or dismissed. While mitigation has been added to address temporary construction impacts to Grayson Creek, water quality, and wildlife, the longterm impacts to sensitive habitats and the wildlife that currently utilizes them remain virtually ignored and unmitigated in the MND. In fact, mitigation measures that would have provided at least some longterm protection to Grayson Creek through riparian corridor fencing and a deed restriction prohibiting development, have been removed from the MND. Concerns about lack of sidewalks and pedestrian safety on Grayson Road due to the density of this development remain. I continue to have concerns about the project and the project MND, as provided in my comments that follow. You will see many of the concerns I expressed in my previous MND comments are repeated here, as they continue to be relevant and were unfortunately not addressed by the current MND. Project Description The concept of a vesting tentative should be explained in the project description so the public understands the advantage the developer is receiving from the county, and what he should provide in return for being granted this advantage; this is a land use issue. The developer is receiving the beneﬁt of a vested right to proceed with the subdivision in substantial compliance with the regulations in effect at the time the project is deemed complete by the county; this protects the developer from potential future changes in regulations. In exchange for this protection, the developer should be required to provide additional details for the project, such as ﬂoor plans, elevations, architectural plans; landscaping plans; parking details; and so forth for all units, including accessory dwelling units. It does not appear that this vesting tentative map goes beyond what would normally be required for a tentative map and environmental review, and there do not appear to be any speciﬁc requirements for vesting tentative maps in the County’s subdivision regulations. The beneﬁts the developer is receiving associated with a vesting tentative map should be clearly described, as should the additional plan requirements for being granted the privilege of a vesting tentative map. If there are no requirements beyond those of a regular tentative map, the county should justify why the development is being granted the privilege of a vesting tentative map. The project description provided at the beginning of the MND lacks sufficient detail to serve as the basis for addressing potential project impacts. The MND instead relies on sections of what should be a single project description that are provided in the analysis sections. While project details are included in the MND discussion sections, the project description at the beginning of this MND should include all project details sufficient to analyze the project, as it provides the basis for environmental review and approval of the project. There are also details missing from the MND analysis discussions serving as a fragmented project description. For example, if accessory dwelling units are included in the project, they Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 3 18 should be included in the project description, and all environmental impact assessments should consider the extra impact burden resulting from the additional dwellings. The MND does not state the distance from the creek to the riparian corridor setback, nor does it describe the width of the riparian corridor that was previously proposed to be protected (previous mitigation measures providing protection are missing.) The project description does not mention the waiver of setback for retaining walls included in the land use section, and nowhere in the MND is the location of the retaining wall mentioned or shown on any project plans. The project plans lack labels for many of the lines shown, including the top of bank and the centerline of the creek channel which should be clearly labeled. This is just some of the missing information. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The site and area description is extremely lacking, as it makes no mention of the riparian, oak woodland, and other protected habitat and vegetation that exists throughout the project site, nor does it mention the wildlife that utilizes the site. Again, while this information is provided in the analysis sections, it should be included in the project description. The description of the surrounding area as representative of single-family residential development in central Contra Costa County is vague and inaccurate. The area immediately surrounding the subject project site on the south side of Grayson Road in the County is very different from development across Grayson Road in Pleasant Hill. The surrounding area must be accurately characterized. This dense development with extremely large homes may be similar to development that is occurring in Pleasant Hill, but is not consistent with the area of the County within which it is proposed. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required This project will require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, yet neither of these agencies are listed here as they should be. 1. AESTHETICS c) While this area may be considered urbanized by the Census Bureau, the visual character of the area is still relatively rural, with signiﬁcant tree cover and larger lots. The proposed reduction in lot width, size, and setbacks combined with the proposed very large homes, relatively small developable area on each lot, and signiﬁcant lot coverage proposed for this subdivision (over 1 acre) will result in a development that is deﬁnitely not in keeping with the immediate surrounding area. As shown on sheet 7 of the project plans, the usable area of many of these lots is no more than approximately half the lot, and in the case of Lots 3, 4 and 5 may be less than half the listed lot size in Table 1 in the LAND USE section. Thus, considering just the lot size when determining aesthetic impacts is misleading. The limited developable area on each of these lots, combined with the setback waivers, results in a subdivision with the density and appearance of the newer dense subdivisions with large homes being built in Pleasant Hill. This circumstance is not appropriate for this general location. The ﬁnding that this residential project is consistent with other residential development immediately surrounding this project is not correct, and cannot be supported with the proposed exceptions to lot width, size and setbacks, and minimal developable area on each lot. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 4 18 In order to not degrade the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings while still allowing for residential development, the density of the development must be reduced. Lot size, width, and setback waivers could then be eliminated, and increased setbacks from the creek to the proposed residential development could be accomplished, all of which is particularly important in light of the size of the proposed homes. In addition, if a landscaping plan is relied on to make the less than signiﬁcant ﬁnding for aesthetics, what measurable performance standards are proposed for landscaping to ensure a less than signiﬁcant impact to aesthetics, particularly since there will not be adequate room on any of the lots to replace the 158 trees to be removed. The requirement for “adequate planting of trees and other landscaping” is not a measurable performance standard, and is relatively meaningless without a clear and detailed deﬁnition of “adequate”. Aesthetics 1: As I mentioned in my previous comments, this mitigation measure makes no mention of ensuring new lighting does not impact the riparian area. The measure states that light will be contained within the project site, but the riparian area is within the project site. Performance standards should specify lighting shall not be allowed to impact the creek and riparian corridor, and shall be fully contained horizontally and vertically within the developed portion of the project. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The biological assessment report was completed in May 2021 and updated in February 2022, according to the initial study. The report states the ﬁeld work was conducted in April of 2021. The initial study further states that an addendum to the biological report was prepared in November of 2022. Unfortunately, no reports, including the addendum to the biological assessment, were attached to the MND, resulting in the MND being incomplete and thus restricting the public’s ability to comment on the ﬁndings. Further, there is no discussion regarding what public agencies with jurisdiction over potentially impacted resources were consulted about this project prior to completion of the initial study with the exception of CDFW, and what their comments were. a) This project has the potential to have a signiﬁcant adverse effect through both temporary construction impacts, permanent habitat loss, and ongoing disturbance from proposed residences. All mitigation currently proposed is to mitigate temporary construction impacts to sensitive habitats, plants and wildlife. There is no discussion of the potential permanent adverse impacts that will result from the virtually complete removal of habitat from everywhere on the property except the riparian corridor, including the removal of some trees whose canopies are located in the riparian corridor, and the introduction of residential uses that will preclude reestablishment of the habitat. There is no analysis of the impacts of noise, lights, and other residential activities on what habitat and wildlife will remain, as well as on reestablishment of destroyed habitat (for example, residential uses leave no room for replanting of removed trees.) There is no analysis or mitigation to address likely intrusions by residents into the riparian corridor that would be facilitated by the close proximity of proposed homes with shallow rear yards to the riparian corridor. A thorough analysis of ongoing residential impacts must be provided. The habitat types listed add up to 2.61 acres, yet the project site is listed as 3.05 acres. What is occurring on the missing 0.44 acres? Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 5 18 Biology 1: This mitigation measure requires compensatory mitigation and avoidance and minimization measures to be implemented to avoid impacts to rare plants. How will avoidance be implemented if sensitive plants are found in the portions of the site to be developed? What is proposed to be done with salvaged seed or root stock since virtually all of this site outside the riparian corridor will be developed with a road, homes, or urban landscaping? Is all compensatory vegetation replacement for sensitive plants and all trees to be removed to occur in the riparian corridor? If so, this is not appropriate. Biology 2: This mitigation measure calls for replacement of on-site riparian woodland to the greatest extent practicable, and on-site replacement of valley oak woodland. What determines what is or is not practicable? Will the developer be allowed to argue that it is not practicable to replace any of the trees, or half of the trees? There should be no nebulous language when calling for replacement of riparian woodland and native trees. Further, rather than allowing for the unilateral removal of riparian and valley oak woodland and native trees to accommodate this excessively dense and hardscaped development, this mitigation measure should call for avoidance of removing this valuable habitat by removing several lots from this development. Subdivision is a privilege, not a right, and the County is not obligated to allow this extreme density and destruction of this valuable habitat, yet it appears there was no consideration of avoidance to minimize the impact to these valuable habitats. CEQA requires avoidance as the ﬁrst step in mitigating impacts. Further, where are the 158 trees to be replaced going to be planted? This site will be 100% developed with residential urban uses (roads, homes, driveways, yards), with the exception of the riparian corridor which already has trees and other vegetation that should not be further disturbed. If extensive replanting of some of these trees is to occur in the riparian corridor, that is itself an impact that must be addressed and mitigation measures to minimize disturbance to this habitat provided. Perhaps a few replacement trees can be planted in the riparian corridor, namely the native trees removed from the riparian woodland, but overall there is no room on this developed site for all the replacement trees. Will they be placed in the front, back and side yards of the lots being created? This would provide minimal area for planting since much of the area of these lots is within the riparian corridor, and front and side setback reductions are proposed, leaving very little yard area, which guarantees any trees planted in yards will stand a strong chance of being removed in the future once homeowners want to landscape. Further, most if not all the trees that must be replanted will get quite large, and are not the kind of trees that homeowners want directly adjacent to their homes. If this mitigation measure is not achievable, it will not mitigate the impact to these valuable habitats that are being removed as well as the wildlife that utilizes these habitats. This mitigation measure does not appear to be achievable given the lack of area to replant trees that will actually grow to maturity and provide the habitat value they currently provide. Additionally, even if some of the trees reach maturity, they will take many years to get large enough to provide any sort of wildlife beneﬁt, and they will not be located in a large contiguous location necessary to reestablish the lost habitat. The analysis of the impact of removing all of these trees must analyze and document where the replacement trees can be planted in a manner that they can actually and reasonably ﬁt with proper spacing and without impacting existing habitat, that they will be protected from removal and retained in place, and that they will provide the habitat value lost by removing the existing trees in a reasonable amount of time, even in light of the activities and impacts associated with Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 6 18 residential uses. This does not seem achievable considering the density and design of this subdivision. While some performance standards have been included in this mitigation measure, this measure must specify: 1) where exactly these trees should be planted so future homeowners can landscape their yards, which they most certainly will want to do and will do, and lost habitat is fully restored; 2) what happens if the trees die within a speciﬁed period of time (i.e. how and when will they be replaced and who will replace them); 3) plant size and other requirements are prescribed for oak woodland trees, but it is unclear whether these requirements also apply to riparian woodland trees; speciﬁc size and standards should be provided for all trees; 4) a requirement that all replacement trees must be from a seed source native to the area; 5) safeguards to insure the new trees are not removed by a future homeowner since they will initially be small and not qualiﬁed as a protected tree unless a mitigation measure speciﬁes them as such, and since removal in the future even with a permit would be contrary to required mitigation; and ﬁnally, 5) how all of this will be monitored. As proposed, this mitigation measure still does not reduce the impact of this tree removal below a threshold of signiﬁcance, even considering other proposed mitigation measures. Biology 4 and 5: This mitigation measure lacks performance standards specifying what is required if pond turtles are found. While mitigation measure Biology 5 mentions exclusion fencing to mitigate impacts to western pond turtles, it speciﬁes amphibians but does not specify reptiles when referring to site monitoring and what must occur if special status reptiles (whip snake and pond turtles) are found. These mitigation measures should be rewritten to be very clear about what must occur regarding special status amphibians and reptiles. Biology 7: This measure requires replanting of undeveloped areas with oak woodland species. However, the only undeveloped areas on this property will be the riparian corridor where no development is allowed and where native riparian species already exist. Is this measure proposing to establish oak woodland in the riparian woodland, which would clearly be inappropriate? Again, there are no undeveloped areas (yards should be considered developed) in this subdivision outside the riparian corridor. In order to fulﬁll this mitigation measure and reestablish oak woodland, several lots must be removed. b) It has been reported by adjoining neighbors that tree cutting resulting in creek and riparian corridor impacts, including deposition of debris in the creek channel, occurred relatively recently and during the time the developer was working on permitting this subdivision. The arborist report was prepared in May of 2020, before the tree removal occurred, and thus does not document the removal. It does not appear that the biological report or the MND reveal this presumably unpermitted tree cutting. Was the loss of habitat that would likely have resulted from tree removal considered to be the baseline for the identiﬁcation of impacts when the biological report was updated in February 2022 and again in November 2022? It is doubtful this is the case since the tree removal is not mentioned in the MND, despite the County being made aware of it in comments on the prior MND. This tree removal occurred pre-project approval and clearly in anticipation of the project. CEQA requires that this early tree removal must be included as part of the MND analysis. Further, appropriate violations must be issued if trees were in fact removed without a permit, and mitigation for the loss of these trees must be required. The developer cannot be allowed to Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 7 18 reduce his mitigation burden by preemptively removing trees. Further, the County cannot further the notion that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than to get permission. Project plans indicate a number of trees whose individual canopies, or canopy cluster the trees are part of, extend into the riparian corridor and are being removed The trees to be removed include at a minimum tree 114, 115, 116, 135, 136, 169, 169b, 170, 171b, 194, and 195, the majority of which are oaks. Some of these trees, along with many others, are identiﬁed for removal because they are in the grading limits. Can they not be retained with minor modiﬁcations to grading, as recommended for trees 137 and 138 in the arborist report? How will the arborist recommendations for trees 137 and 138 be enforced? There seems to be no attempt to avoid tree removal, contrary to CEQA mitigation requirements. The MND contains no description of how the riparian setback was established, and no description of the width of the riparian setback from the creek channel, centerline, or from the top-of-bank. Neither the creek centerline nor the top-of-bank are shown on the development plans (or perhaps they are just not labeled). As shown on Figure 11 in the biological report, in some locations the top-of-bank is either commensurate with or extends beyond the riparian setback, which apparently is the drip line of the trees that were determined to comprise the northerly boundary of the riparian corridor. Policy 8.89 of the general plan Conservation Element requires a minimum 50-ft. setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek. How does the proposed riparian setback compare to the minimum 50- ft. setback? The MND needs to clarify the difference between the riparian setback area and the creek structure setback line, and what can occur within each area. Project plans show the limit of the riparian area with a note that no grading will be allowed. Beyond that line, plans shows the creek structure setback line. It would appear that grading would be allowed within the creek structure setback area outside the riparian setback line, which based on cross- sections, would mean that grading would be allowed up to and below the top of the creek bank which is inappropriate, and therefore demands the extension of the riparian setback area to a point beyond the top of bank. Again, the plans do not clearly show the creek centerline nor the top of bank; this should be remedied to insure the riparian setback area is adequate. It currently does not appear the riparian setback is sufficient to protect Grayson Creek since grading would be allowed beyond the top of bank outside the riparian setback, and tree canopy is being removed within the riparian corridor. Without the riparian setback line extending well beyond the top of bank, which is not what is being proposed, Grayson Creek is left vulnerable to both construction and residential activities. Has the County determined that Grayson Creek, or at least the portion within this subdivision, is a “protected watercourse” due to its signiﬁcant riparian habitat, and thereby requires protection in its natural state pursuant to County Code section 914-4.002, and if not, why not? The MND analyzes how the creek and riparian corridor would be impacted and how those impacts would be mitigated during construction, but is generally silent regarding the impacts associated with the establishment and ongoing activities of permanent residential uses, all of which will occur very close to Grayson Creek. What is not reﬂected in the lot sizes is the fact that the lots include the riparian area, and due to the setback waivers coupled with the number of lots proposed, there is very little rear yard on the majority of the lots, thus encouraging use of the riparian area as part of these homes backyards. A permanent fence was previously proposed by Mitigation Measure Biology 6 to be installed along the riparian corridor. However, the requirement for a permanent fence is no Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 8 18 longer identiﬁed in a mitigation measure as a requirement of the project. How does the County plan to ensure that future property owners do not extend their backyards into the protected riparian area? This fence was described as “wildlife friendly”, but there was no discussion as to what that meant, how the fence would be maintained and by whom, and how the county would insure future property owners do not remove the fence. It appears the riparian setback area is based on the drip line of trees in the riparian corridor, and the line deﬁning the riparian corridor is anything but straight, with many, many small twists and turns. It was therefore unclear as to how a fence was supposed to be constructed along such a line. While these were issues that needed to be addressed regarding this fence, the removal of the fence requirement as a mitigation measure leaves the riparian area vulnerable to development by homeowners as they attempt to extend their rear yards, given the small size of those yards. Why was the fence requirement removed, and how does the county intend to ensure multiple rear yards of the lots in this development do not get extended into the riparian area? The requirement to deed restrict the creek structure setback area provided by previous Mitigation Measure Biology 6 also seems to have been eliminated. The measure stated that the creek structure setback area would be deed restricted, precluding any kind of development, including grading. However, the current MND no longer contains a mitigation measure requiring this deed restriction, yet the project plans still contain a note stating the “developer to relinquish development rights with (sic) creek structure setback area.” Please clarify if this deed restriction is still a requirement and if so, this requirement should be added back into a mitigation measure to ensure the requirement is clear and enforceable. If the deed restriction is no longer required, the MND needs to address this change, explaining why it was removed and how adequate protection for Grayson Creek would still be provided. Based on the design and density of this subdivision, particularly the lack of undeveloped space to accommodate required replanting of oak and riparian woodland, the small rear yards backing up to Grayson Creek, and the lack of mitigation for longterm residential impacts to Grayson Creek and any reestablished habitat, impacts to Grayson Creek and the riparian corridor are not mitigated below a threshold of signiﬁcance. c) Regarding the protection of state and federally protected wetlands, the ﬁnding of less than signiﬁcant impact is based on a number of things. The ﬁnding is partially based on the creation of a riparian setback, which as discussed above in b), does not appear adequate to protect Grayson Creek. The ﬁnding is also based on the creation of a creek structure setback, as required by Mitigation Measure Biology 6 from the previous MND, but no longer included as a mitigation measure in the revised MND, although it is still shown on project plans. It appears this setback area excludes fencing, landscaping, and structures except for drainage structures. However, trees and other vegetation will be removed from the creek structure setback area and grading will apparently be allowed in this setback, including beyond the top of bank along Grayson Creek as noted above. These activities will impact wildlife, the riparian corridor, and the creek by permanently removing valuable habitat, protected trees, and by exposing the crowns of trees remaining that are currently part of a group of trees as well as exposing their root systems to grading impacts. Once these exceptionally large homes are built, with the majority of the lots along the setback having very little backyard, future owners will undoubtedly expand their backyards into the setback area, which is not allowed. How will this expansion be prevented? I doubt the county will monitor the situation, and the backyards are not visible form the street, so Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 9 18 how does the public have conﬁdence that the setback area will be left undeveloped and natural as required? Sheet 4 of the development plans provides some information as to how the creek structure setback was calculated. It appears that only one cross-section was provided at the east end of Grayson Creek with six cross-sections on the westerly end. There are no cross- sections in the middle of this stretch of creek. What was the basis for the location of the cross-sections? How was the number and location of cross-sections determined to be adequate for the establishment of the structure setback lines? How was it determined that the entire creek section is adequately represented by these cross-sections? Regarding structure setback lines, County Code section 914-14.012(d) states that where signiﬁcant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required by section (c) of this same section (the limits the subdivision utilizes), the county may extend the setback line to include such areas. What was the basis for not requiring this additional area, given the number of oaks and other trees that are proposed to be removed, particularly since the trees being removed have crowns that are part of the riparian canopy? d) The revised MND properly notes the Grayson Creek riparian area serves a a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursery sites. It does not appear to acknowledge that the oak woodland that will be completely destroyed provides nesting habitat for migrating birds. Undoubtedly other creatures utilize and pass through this property. How will the virtually complete removal of existing habitat everywhere on this site, except the relatively narrow riparian corridor, to be replaced with development of residences and their associated disruptive activities leaving no room to replant destroyed trees, not impede use of wildlife corridors and nursery sites currently located on this property? Is the 0.8 acres of riparian corridor that will remain and have residential uses directly adjacent to it sufficient to address all current wildlife migration and nursery use on the property, considering the signiﬁcant loss of oak woodland? Missing from this discussion is identiﬁcation of the connectivity of Grayson Creek with offsite portions of the watercourse and habitats, particularly in regard to ﬁsh passage. This is not an isolated section of a creek or habitat, as demonstrated by its use by ﬁsh and local wildlife. The County was provided with helpful information in this regard by a property owner who commented on the ﬁrst MND. This information must be provided in the MND, and it must be demonstrated that loss of a signiﬁcant amount of habitat that has no location on the developed site to be replaced, coupled with the introduction of residential uses, will not interfere with wildlife movement through and use of this property. The MND discussion cites Mitigation Measure Biology 2 through 6 as mitigation for impacts to the use of this property as a wildlife corridor and nursery sites. It is speciﬁcally noted that these measures call for tree replacement; however, this requirement is unachievable since there is no undeveloped area where 158 trees can be replanted and grow to maturity in a manner that will provide lost habitat. The MND discussion also states that post- construction measures for protection of the riparian are included in these measures, but in fact no such measures are provided. The previous MND required fencing along the riparian boundary and a deed restriction of the creek structure setback area prohibiting development. Those mitigation measures have been removed from the project. The conclusion that the project poses a less than signiﬁcant impact to the movement of wildlife is not fully supported and remains potentially signiﬁcant. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 10 18 e) This discussion makes no mention of CEQA section 21083.4 regarding the protection and mitigation of impacts to oak woodland. There is a signiﬁcant area of oak woodland, in addition to mixed woodland on this site. CEQA impacts relative to this section of the CEQA statutes should be addressed. General Plan Policy 8-6 requires signiﬁcant trees, natural vegetation and wildlife populations generally shall be preserved. The discussion states multiple trees on the property will be preserved. According to the arborist report, there are 117 trees greater than 6 inches in diameter on the project site, and 84 of these trees (72%) will be removed, with three additional trees removed prior to the arborist inventory. Of the remaining trees, 17 will be subjected to dripline encroachment during grading, and thus put at risk. Only 16 trees will remain that would not be at risk during site grading. Thus, it is clear that this project does not preserve “signiﬁcant trees and vegetation”. Further, replacement of all of these trees is impossible since there is no undeveloped area outside the riparian corridor where they can be planted and be expected to mature in a manner that will reestablish lost habitat. General Plan Policy 8-12 requires natural woodlands shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible in the course of land development. Replacement of trees to be removed from the site does not constitute compliance with this policy, particularly since virtually all of the 1.2 acres of oak woodland, 0.2 acres of mixed woodland, and 0.2 acres of the 1 acre of riparian habitat that currently exists on the site will be completely destroyed, with no location outside the riparian woodland corridor that will remain undeveloped where this habitat can be reestablished. Having a random remaining tree, or planting an oak here and there, does not constitute reestablishment of these woodland habitats. The only way to come close to mitigating the impact of this development is to reduce the number of lots by at least half. As currently proposed, not only does this project violate the general plan, its impacts to these woodland habitats remain signiﬁcant and unmitigated. The above are just two of the general plan policies that the project does not comply with. In general, many of the policies listed in the MND call for the preservation of natural vegetation and wildlife areas, which is not what is proposed for this project. While most of the riparian corridor will remain intact, a portion of the riparian woodland and all of the oak and mixed woodland will be destroyed. Grading will occur over the top of bank of Grayson Creek. Rear yards are extremely small for most of the lots along the creek and are located in very close proximity to the riparian boundary, with no post-construction mitigation measures proposed. Reestablishment of the habitats to be removed is not possible given that there will be no undeveloped land upon which to replant trees and reestablish lost habitat. Thus, the mitigation measure calling for replanting of trees cited to demonstrate compliance with some of these policies cannot be implemented and is therefore not mitigation for the signiﬁcant impact that will occur to natural habitats on this property. This project is, for the most part, not in compliance with these general plan policies. As mentioned previously, trees have reportedly already been removed from this property, undoubtedly in anticipation of this project. There is no discussion about this removal, including whether or not the number of trees to be removed as part of the project include the trees already removed, or is in addition to those trees. Was a permit obtained for this removal? What are the ﬁndings that were made made to support removal of these protected trees? As mentioned above, if trees were previously removed, they must be documented and any prescribed mitigation must apply to their removal. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 11 18 One of the reasons tree removal can be approved according the county code is “reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot.” Subdivision is a privilege, not a right, so what determines “reasonable development”? It is certainly not synonymous with “maximum development”, yet that appears to be the standard applied here. This project could certainly be redesigned to avoid such extensive tree and habitat removal, including creating fewer lots and a larger riparian corridor/open space area, and requiring smaller development footprints as part of the vesting tentative map approval. CEQA requires avoidance of environmental impacts as a ﬁrst step, yet there seems to be no consideration or discussion of how removal of these trees and habitat could be avoided, nor any justiﬁcation provided for their removal. The fact that a property owner does not have a right to subdivide, combined with CEQA’s requirement for impact avoidance where feasible, and considering the other impacts of this project, would point to the need to signiﬁcantly reduce the density of this development. 6. ENERGY a) As mentioned in my previous comments, a less than signiﬁcant ﬁnding for this section is partially supported by a statement that the “project is located in an urban residential neighborhood, within walking distance of a commercial district, and within biking distance of the Pleasant Hill Bart Station. The close proximity to these amenities could reduce the automobile trip generation from the project; thus, reducing energy consumption.” This statement neglects to recognize that ﬁrst, this is not a typical urban neighborhood with fully developed sidewalks and bike lanes. In fact, sidewalks are missing along much of Grayson Road, and walking on Grayson is dangerous given the excessive speed at which traffic travels on this road. Also, are there bike lanes to safely travel from the subdivision to the Pleasant Hill Bart Station? Second, the county is inappropriately giving the developer a waiver on constructing sidewalks in his Grayson Road frontage despite the fact that the subdivision will add to the need for sidewalks considering its density, further insuring there will likely never be completed sidewalks along this road or if there are sidewalks added in the future, they will be unjustiﬁably installed at taxpayer expense. The claim that a commercial district is within walking distance of this subdivision and that this will save energy is disingenuous under these circumstances. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS g) As provided in my comments under WILDFIRE, the ﬁre risk for this subdivision is higher than a standard urbanized area. There is a signiﬁcant amount of vegetation including trees, shrubs, and grassland in and around this area. There are also overhead power lines, which together with the natural vegetation, pose a ﬁre risk. Will power lines be placed underground in the subdivision? I could not locate this information on the plans, not to say it is not there. Even if they are to be placed underground, there are overhead lines in the area surrounding the subdivision that together with the surrounding vegetation, pose a ﬁre risk to this subdivision that exceeds risks of typical urban subdivisions. The vegetation in and around this subdivision that is atypical of areas most people consider urbanized, coupled with the the proposed large homes virtually on top of each other given the proposal for reduced side yard setbacks as well as homes adjacent to a wooded area, Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 12 18 serves to provide a ﬁre risk that is higher than typical urban areas. If one home catches ﬁre, it is highly likely that neighboring homes will, as well. Further, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced due to vegetation removal is potentially very telling as to the County’s commitment (or lack thereof) to reestablishing habitats that will be removed from this project. The project calls for replanting of all trees on the project site, many at a 3:1 ratio. Is this requirement just smoke and mirrors, and is the County actually envisioning a permanent removal of all of the vegetation (i.e. sensitive habitats)? As previously noted, it is unclear where all the trees to be replanted could possibly be located given the lack of undeveloped area remaining on the project site outside the riparian corridor. However, if the goal or replanting lost trees and habitat can be met per mitigation requirements, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced as a result of vegetation removal is incorrect and in direct conﬂict with the requirement to replant this vegetation. Finally, this section seems to ignore the increased ﬁre risk to all of the County brought about by climate change, and the risk that continues to increase with hotter temperatures, ongoing drought, and increasing population density not appropriate. 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY b) While wells will not be required to serve this subdivision, this project will interfere with groundwater supplies and recharge, given the extent of over 1 acre of impermeable surface being proposed, and with the direction of stormwater runoff from impermeable surfaces into the storm drain system. The MND claims that the treatment planter (detention basin) would maintain existing groundwater recharging, yet the MND states that the ﬂowthrough treatment planter will treat water from impervious surfaces prior to connecting to the public storm drain system. This water would therefore not contribute to the groundwater recharge process currently occurring on the site, contrary to what the MND claims. Further, I would suspect the project could also impact the amount of runoff that feeds Grayson Creek, but there is no analysis of this potential impact, which should be provided. This discussion does not support a ﬁnding of less than signiﬁcant impact, and is actually completely irrelevant to the question. c) Section ii claims that the project will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff. The project proposes a signiﬁcant amount of impervious surface compared to what currently exists, resulting in a substantial increase in runoff compared to current conditions, as well as a change in drainage pattern since runoff with be channeled into the storm drain system. This may not result in ﬂooding as this section concludes, but the basis for the claim is erroneous. 11. LAND USE PLANNING b) In the official density determination for this project, the County used 2.99 dwelling units per acre rather than 2.9 as stated in the MND, resulting in 8.28 units per acre, rounded to 9 base units for this subdivision. The calculation was based on a net acreage of 2.76, which was calculated by subtracting the private right of way proposed for this project from the total project site acreage. Table 3-4 of the county’s general plan Land Use Element states that “net acreage includes all land area used exclusively for residential purposes, and excludes streets, highways, and all other public rights-of-way. Net acreage is assumed to constitute 75 percent of gross Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 13 18 acreage for all uses, except for the Multi-Family designations, where it is assumed to comprise 80 percent.” Considering this deﬁnition, the county’s “conservative” density calculation appears to be quite the opposite. For example, a more conservative estimate would be based on 75% of the 3.05 gross project acreage, which results in 2.29 net acres, multiplied by 2.99 is 6.85 which rounds up to 7 base units, rather than 9 as the county is proposing. One moderate unit would be 15% of 7 base units qualifying for a 10% bonus, which would allow one additional unit for a total of 8, two lots less than what is being proposed, although still too dense for this site. However, in this case, based on the deﬁnition of net acreage, there are at least two areas that should be removed from the net acreage calculation, 0.29 acres for the street and 1.5 deed restricted acres for the Grayson Creek structure setback area where no development would be allowed. Previous Mitigation Measure Biology 7 required that the creek structure setback area be protected from development via a permanent deed restriction and dedication of development rights to the County. (This mitigation measure has been removed from the MND, but the project plans still contain a note that the area will be deed restricted. The mitigation measure should be added back into the MND.) These two areas are therefore clearly excluded from use for residential purposes, and cannot be included in the net acreage for the project. Subtracting the 1.5 acre creek setback area as described in the previous MND (the setback acreage is not included in the current MND) and the subdivision roadway results in a net acreage of 1.26, which when multiplied by 2.99 maximum allowed density, results in 3.77 or 4 base units when rounded. One moderate unit divided by the base units equals 25%, allowing for a 20% density bonus, multiplied by 4 base units equals 4.8, allowing one additional unit for a total of 5 units, a more reasonable density for this project. Limiting this project to no more than 5 lots would allow either larger lots with the required setbacks more in keeping with the surrounding area and would allow signiﬁcantly more trees to be retained as well as more area for trees to be replanted, or it would allow a larger riparian corridor with lots perhaps remaining a bit smaller and clustered closer to Grayson Road, again allowing more trees to remain and offering additional protection for Grayson Creek. This approach would also be consistent with the County’s general plan Chapter 3 Land Use Element, where the description of the land use designation Single-Family Residential-Low Density states that unique environmental characteristics of a parcel may justify larger lot sizes. Requested waivers should be revisited using what should be the correct calculation for the number of allowed lots in this project by removing the roadway and the creek structure setback area. The waiver of lot width with the number of lots currently proposed creates lot widths completely inconsistent with the area immediately surrounding this property. It also reduces the area where 158 trees will need to be replanted and retained because they are mitigation and therefore cannot ever be removed. With the reduced lot size, lot width, and lot setbacks, there is no room to plant trees that will grow quite large. The waiver of curb, gutter and sidewalk poses a safety concern when considering 10 lots, as discussed in the Transportation section, and would be a more reasonably accommodated for only 5 lots. The waiver of the setback requirement for retaining walls needs to be explained; what is the waiver being requested, why is it being requested, and where is the retaining wall? Compliance with things such as lot size and setbacks can be waived if compliance would prohibit creation of the affordable lot pursuant to state housing law. Lot width and size requirements are being waived in this case. However, it appears that even without the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 14 18 affordable lot, nine lots would still result in substandard lot sizes, widths, and setbacks. Therefore, nine lots should not be considered as the baseline since they could not be constructed without the granting of variances, which would be illegal since the need for them would be self-created. Further, the ﬁnding that the affordable lot is driving the need for these waivers from development standards cannot be made since the nine base lots would require the same waiver. Please provide an explanation as to how the County is making the ﬁnding that it is the affordable lot that is driving the need for the development standards waivers, and how a ﬁnding that nine lots is the base number allowed given that they would require development standard waivers, which would require the illegal granting of variances. Also, please explain how it was determined that housing law waivers apply to all lots, and not just the affordable lot. Granting of a concession is contingent on the requirement that no impacts to the public health or safety result. Clearly the waiver of sidewalk requirements for a 10-lot subdivision on a busy and dangerous street would negatively impact the public health and safety, particularly when the CEQA document identiﬁes the ability to walk to services as a characteristic of the subdivision, and that this characteristic will reduce energy use. Please explain how the County intends to make the ﬁnding that excusing the developer from constructing sidewalks on his Grayson frontage will not impact the public health and safety. It seems very clear that one moderate income unit is included in this development strictly for the purpose of maximizing the density of this subdivision through waivers of development standards and avoidance of subdivision construction requirements (frontage improvements) pursuant to state housing law, and not for the purpose of providing affordable housing. The affordable unit is in the worst location and is the smallest lot and home in the subdivision, and will clearly reveal itself in the subdivision as a home for lower income people. Waivers and concessions are meant to facilitate the creation of affordable housing, not facilitate increased density of high end housing. This circumstance should not be acceptable to the County, and is certainly not beneﬁtting the greater public good. Also, has the county received documentation showing that the requested incentives and waivers are ﬁnancially necessary to construct the one moderate affordable home? This information should included in the MND land use analysis. Finally, It is clear that the county’s interpretation of housing law is resulting in a subdivision with signiﬁcant unmitigated impacts to public trust resources, as well as impacts resulting from a development completely out of character with its surroundings, due to its extremely high density. Does housing law allow development of projects with signiﬁcant impacts to public trust resources for the purpose of including one affordable unit? These impacts would certainly impact the public’s health and safety which is not allowed by housing law. Maintaining healthy ecosystems translates to health beneﬁts for not just the natural environment but for humans as well, and conversely, impacts to natural and human ecosystems is detrimental to the natural and human environment and inhabitants. How does the county intend to address the health and safety impacts, which are contrary to housing law, that will result from the density proposed for this subdivision? The lot area shown on Table 1 listed without also including developable area for each lot is misleading. As shown on sheet 7 of the project plans, the usable area of many of these lots is no more than approximately half the lot, and in the case of Lots 3, 4 and 5 may be less than half the listed lot size. The limited developable area on each of these lots, combined with the setback waivers, results in a subdivision with the density and appearance of the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 15 18 newer dense subdivisions being built in Pleasant Hill, which is not appropriate for this general location, and in particular for this property. Consideration must be given to the the signiﬁcant number of waivers requested by the applicant. The substantial ﬁnancial value of those waivers to the applicant that will be realized via increased density and a waiver of sidewalks on Grayson, must be weighed against the cost of those waivers to the public via resource impacts, loss of a required frontage improvements, increased traffic impacts, the addition of one moderate income home, and so forth. The waivers are likely worth tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars and will burden taxpayers with future costs, all for the small public beneﬁt of a single moderate income home, the smallest home on the smallest lot in the worst location in the subdivision. The granting of these waivers is not in the public interest, and should be limited or denied. 13. NOISE b)While the addition of mitigation measure Noise 1 is a positive step, some edits to this measure would be appropriate. Rather than simply posting a notice on the construction site, which may not be readily accessible by neighbors, the developer or contractor should mail a notice to each nearby resident providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. This is not a difficult thing to accomplish, and should be required by the County. In addition, the hours of operation for noise producing activities are a bit excessive. Noisy activities during the week should end at 6:00 PM. Nobody should have to sit at the dinner table in their homes and listen to construction activities. Saturday activities should be limited to the hours of 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM. This is a quiet residential neighborhood, and noise-generating activities should be limited accordingly. 17. TRANSPORTATION a) The waiver of frontage requirements proposed for this subdivision is short sighted, dangerous, and sets a precedent that will result in either no complete sidewalks on Grayson, or the public having to pay for improvements the developer should have to pay for, when someone gets hit by a speeding car on Grayson. Ten new homes and potentially as many ADUs will contribute additional traffic and pedestrians to an area with speeding traffic and fragmented sidewalks where it is already unsafe to walk, thereby creating a health and safety risk for subdivision pedestrians and adding to the risk for existing pedestrians due to increased traffic on a road with few sidewalks. It is interesting that a sidewalk is proposed within the subdivision, but no sidewalk is proposed on Grayson. The public, both pedestrians and drivers, will be negatively impacted by increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic on Grayson resulting from the proposed subdivision, with no improvements to compensate for the subdivision’s impacts. In the Energy section of the initial study, the claim is made that the project is located within walking distance of a commercial district. However, there are incomplete sidewalks on Grayson, so walking to the commercial district has signiﬁcant safety issues. These safety issues will be exacerbated with the increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic contributed by this subdivision. The MND does not discuss pedestrian impacts resulting from increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and is thus deﬁcient. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 16 18 Complete frontage improvements are standard requirements of subdivisions, and sidewalks are desperately needed on Grayson. With limited existing sidewalk on the south side of Grayson, and also incomplete sidewalk on the north side, the County’s goal should be to gradually provide sidewalks all along Grayson rather than look for ways to help a developer avoid standard improvements to the detriment of the public and the beneﬁt of the developer’s bottom line. Instead of working to achieve the goal of completing Grayson sidewalks, the County supports granting a waiver of frontage improvements for this project because the developer does not want to pay for them, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill in the future. Justiﬁcation for granting of the waiver includes the claim that it would be prohibitively expensive given the length of the frontage, grading, tree removal and utility requirements. The project is already doing signiﬁcant grading, constructing utilities, and removing 97 trees to enable the maximum development of this property with as many large homes as possible, rather then reducing the number of homes to a reasonable density to preserve the valuable habitat on this property, the best option for site development. There does not seem to be an issue with the expense of grading, utilities, and especially tree removal when it directly enables maximum site development, meaning maximum proﬁts, but tree removal all of a sudden becomes too expensive when considering development of frontage improvements? This is not a legitimate reason to not require frontage developments, particularly given the extreme density of this development. Tree removal for a sidewalk could be eliminated with a bit of creativity locating the sidewalk; sidewalks do not need to be straight. A signiﬁcant reduction in the number of subdivision lots could create a situation where frontage improvements may be considered for waiver. Further justiﬁcation for waiving frontage improvements is provided by the statement that there is no sidewalk within 1000 feet of the subdivision to connect to, and adjacent properties that front Grayson are not expected to develop in the future (another example of why the proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the neighborhood), meaning it is not anticipated that these adjacent properties will be required to provide frontage sidewalks in the near future. The County is rationalizing the elimination of sidewalks for this subdivision based on the fact that they would not connect to sidewalks on adjacent properties now or in the near future, so the County sees no point in requiring this subdivision to provide sidewalks now. This is extremely poor planning, as it sets up a scenario where there will never be sidewalks on Grayson unless the public is willing to pay for them, rather than the developer as is the norm when subdivisions are approved. If the lots adjacent to the proposed subdivision were to develop in the future, it is reasonable that they will also ask for and receive a waiver of frontage requirements because they will use the same rationale for which the County is setting precedent, that there will be no sidewalk for them to connect to. They will also claim expense, and so forth, again a precedent being set here by the County. The end result will be the public having to pay for sidewalks that are desperately needed along Grayson because the developer does not want to pay for the improvements. If development concessions are to be made in order to provide moderate income housing, the public should get something comparable from the deal in return. However, in this case, it appears the developer and the County are using the inclusion of just one moderate income home, the smallest home in the worst location and on the smallest lot in the subdivision to ultimately place the burden of a future sidewalk on the public, which is unacceptable. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 17 18 MND also justiﬁes the waiver of frontage improvements based on Density Bonus law. The County is required to grant incentives and concessions consistent with this law unless the County makes certain written ﬁndings based on substantial evidence. One of those ﬁndings is that the concession or incentive would have a speciﬁc, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment for which there is no feasible mitigation. The elimination of frontage improvements, most speciﬁcally sidewalk, has an adverse impact on public health and safety as discussed. The MND never analyzes impacts on pedestrian safety, and at the density proposed by this subdivision, there is no way to mitigate the impact caused by waiving frontage requirements. This concession should be denied or alternatively, the subdivision should be redesigned to a lower density in keeping with the rural nature of the surrounding area, thereby decreasing the vehicle and pedestrian contribution to Grayson Road. Regarding the trip generation discussion, the neighborhood has been told that the new homes will include ADUs. If this is the case, then the trip generation, parking needs, and so forth will increase. If ADUs are proposed as part of this development, this circumstance should be described and analyzed in the MND. c) Although the project may not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature speciﬁcally, it will certainly contribute more traffic to Grayson Road. At certain times of the day, it can be challenging to enter Grayson from Mohawk, especially because traffic often travels faster than the speed limit The stopping time may be adequate for 35 mph for the new intersection, but it does not match the reality of the speed on Grayson. Cars have gathered speed by the time they reach Mohawk coming from either direction, and will make entering Grayson from Mohawk that much more challenging. This project will increase traffic risks above the current level for existing homes. 20. WILDFIRE (this section repeats the discussion included in HAZARDS) The ﬁre risk for this subdivision is higher than a standard urbanized area. There is a signiﬁcant amount of vegetation including trees, shrubs, and grassland in and around this area. There are also overhead power lines, which together with the natural vegetation, pose a ﬁre risk. Will power lines be placed underground in the subdivision? I could not locate this information on the plans, not to say it’s not there. Even if they are to be placed underground, there are overhead lines in the area surrounding the subdivision, posing a ﬁre risk to this subdivision that exceeds risks of typical urban subdivisions. The vegetation in and around this subdivision that is atypical of areas most people consider urbanized, coupled with the the proposed large homes virtually on top of each other given the proposal for reduced side yard setbacks as well as home adjacent to a wooded area, serves to provide a ﬁre risk that is higher than typical urban areas. If one home catches ﬁre, it is highly likely that neighboring homes will, as well. Further, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced due to vegetation removal is potentially very telling as to the County’s commitment (or lack thereof) to reestablishing habitats that will be removed from this project. The project calls for replanting of all trees on the project site, many at a 3:1 ratio. Is this requirement not genuine, and is the County instead envisioning a permanent removal of all of the vegetation on this site (i.e. sensitive habitats) outside the riparian area? As previously noted, it is unclear where all the trees to be replanted could possibly be located given the lack of natural area remaining on the project site outside the riparian corridor. However, if the goal of replanting lost trees and habitat can be met per Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision County File #CDSD20-09531 Mitigated Negative Declaration April 24, 2023 Page of 18 18 mitigation requirements, the claim that ﬁre risk will be reduced as a result of vegetation removal is incorrect and in direct conﬂict with the requirement to replant this vegetation. Finally, this section seems to ignore the increased ﬁre risk to all of the County brought about by climate change, and the risk that continues to increase with hotter temperatures, ongoing drought, and increasing population density not appropriate. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Some project impacts, including but not limited to biological impacts from permanent habitat removal and traffic impacts, and remain potentially signiﬁcant. It is an important reminder to the public and decision makers that the subdivision of a property is a privilege, not a right. The goal of the developer and the County for this development is clear - to force as much density on this property as possible by including one moderate income home, being the smallest home on the smallest lot in the worst location in this subdivision, in order to obtain as many concessions and waivers as possible so a maximum density subdivision can be developed, while disregarding the longterm loss of the sensitive and protected habitat and the health and safety concerns of the community. Previous owners recognized the value of less density when developing this property, but it is clear the current proposal makes no attempt balance development with existing habitat and community values, which is unfortunate and simply not the right thing to do. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my comments. This project has potentially signiﬁcant environmental impacts due to the habitat located on the project site, the number of lots being proposed, and the waivers being requested. All impacts have not been identiﬁed, analyzed, or mitigated below a threshold of signiﬁcance. As suggested in my previous MND comments and by other comments you have received from neighbors in the project area, a signiﬁcant reduction in the number of lots, by at least ﬁfty percent, would be more appropriate for maintaining the existing habitat values on this site and protecting community values and the public interest, while allowing the applicant the privilege of subdividing the property. Sincerely, Lisa D. Shikany 115 Harlan Way Fortuna, CA 95540 Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 1.Photo taken facing south showing the two-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat at northwestern boundary of Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 2.Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat within the northeastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 3. Photo taken facing west showing riparian woodland habitat within the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 4. Photo taken facing northeast showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 5. Photo taken facing southeast showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat within the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 6. Photo taken facing south showing the single-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat located near the southern boundary of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 7. Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 8. Photo taken facing south showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 9. Photo taken facing southeast showing portion of Grayson Creek. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 10. Photo taken facing southeast showing Grayson Creek and associated riparian woodland corridor. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 11. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland with existing residential structure in the background. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 12. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland habitat in the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD PLEASANT HILL, CA © 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021351 | 12-15-21 Conceptual Streetscene A1 NTS Plan 2 | Modern Farmhouse (R)Plan 1 | Modern FarmhousePlan 2 | Modern Prairie Plan 3 | Modern Prairie (R) 3050SH3050SH3050SH3050SHBI-PASS6080 268024802480 24 80BI-PASS50802680 3050SH2050 SH3050SH26803050SH2680 14'-0" x 17'-0"11'-0" x 11'-0"12'-2" x 13'-0"2050 SH2050SHBDRM 3MAIN BDRMBDRM 23050SH3050SH30803050SH3050SH 26803050SH3050SHBI-PASS8080 14'-0" x 19'-5"11'-0" x 12'-10"BONUS RMBDRM 416'-0" x 8'-0" SECT. GAR. DOOR3080FR. DOORPR. T.G. 3050 SH3050SH2050SH 3050 SH3050SH 30 SC801650SH 3050SH6050SH3050SH2050SH4050SH2050SHTEMP. GL. SLIDER8060 3050 SH3050SH3050SH28802880 2 4 8 0 2480 28802480 24802480 2680 17'-0" x 18'-6"20'-0" x 21'-3"3050SH3050SH11'-0" x 13'-0"10'-0" x 12'-10"10'-0" x 18'-4"KITCHENBDRM 5OPT. CALIF. RM.DENDINNING2-CAR GARAGEGREAT ROOM3050 SH BI-PASS4080 24 80 285 SF.10'-0"48'-0"7'-0"14'-0"18'-6"12'-6"45'-0"65'-0"45'-0"13'-7"6'-0"6'-6"16'-11"65'-0" 10'-0"7'-4"6'-0"34'-8"7'-0"A.D.U.| 2021351 | 11-24-21C 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA. 1024 & 1026 Grayson RoadPLEASANT HILL, CA0 2 4 83,582 SF5 Bdrm|4.5 Bath|2 Den|Loft|ADU 2-Car GarageA3.01Second Floor 1,796 SFFirst Floor 1,786 SFPLAN 3 103 105 106 109 110107 111 113 123 104 124 153 125 126 128 129 127 133 132 131 151 150 152 156 158 164 165 166 147 148 149 146 145 143 144 141 142 140 139 136 135114115 116 130 175 176 177 178 180 184 187 188 193194 195 174 168 169 170 167 171 171B 108 112 131 G R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SFLOT8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF TOTAL UNITS: 10 RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SUMMARY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT EASTON C. MCALLISTER, PE DATE UTILITIES: AT&T PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CITY OF PLEASANT HILL CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT COMCAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FPD CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT CABLE TELEVISION: TELEPHONE: SEWAGE DISPOSAL: FIRE PROTECTION: WATER SUPPLY: GAS & ELECTRIC: STORM DRAIN: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-15EXISTING ZONING: CIVIL ENGINEER: PROPOSED LAND USE: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: TOTAL AREA: SUBDIVIDER: SURVEYOR: 3.05± AC GROSS (2.76± AC NET) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO:166-030-001 & 002 PROPERTY ADDRESS: P.E. #61148 EXP 12/31/20 ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES 925-683-5493 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD DANVILLE, CA 94526 (925) 837-3780 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD DANVILLE, CA 94526 (925) 837-3780 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD PLEASANT HILL, CA 94523 CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK ON THIS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD CIVIL ENGINEERING PRACTICE. VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 01/28/22 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD CITY OF PLEASANT HILL, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FLOOD ZONE VICINITY MAP N.T.S. THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE DERIVED FROM SURFACE OBSERVATION AND ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. ACTUAL LOCATION AND SIZE, TOGETHER WITH PRESENCE OF ANY ADDITIONAL UTILITY LINES NOT SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. BLDG CONC (E)/EX ESMT FNC INV. P.U.E REBAR. () R/W SSCO SSMH SDDI (T) WM WV BUILDING CONCRETE EXISTING EASEMENT FENCE INVERT PRIVATE UTILITY EASEMENT REBAR RECORD DATA RIGHT OF WAY SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STORM DRAIN DRAIN INLET TOTAL WATER METER WATER VALVE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WATER VALVE FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED STANDARD STREET MONUMENT EASEMENT LINE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY LINE TIE LINE CENTERLINE EXISTING WATER LINE EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPE EXISTING ELECTRIC CABLE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING UTILITY NOTE: ZONE A: SPECIAL FLOOD AREA WITHOUT BASE FLOOD. ELEVATION (BFE) ZONE X: AREAS OF 0.2% CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS PROTECTED BY LEVEES FROM 1% CHANCE FLOOD. FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PANEL NUMBER 06013C0280G, DATED 03/21/2017. LEGEND: No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP DESCRIPTIONNUMBER SHEET INDEX 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRIANAGE AND UTILITY PLAN HYDROLOGY AND STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN CREEK STRUCTURE SETBACK EXHIBIT TREE INVENTORY SHEET TREE INVENTORY SHEET CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LAYOUT PROPERTY OWNER:ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES 925-683-5493 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 *BUILDING SETBACKS MINIMUM SIDE YARD WIDTH SHALL BE 5' MINIMUM, 10' AGGREGATE FOR LOTS 51 FEET OR LESS IN WIDTH; 5' MINIMUM, 15' AGGREGATE FOR LOTS BETWEEN 51' AND 80' WIDTH. (COUNTY ORDINANCE SECTION 82-14.004) FRONT SETBACK:14' TO LIVING AREA 20' TO GARAGE 101 102 1 154 155 157 160 159 161 162 163 137 138 117 118 119 122 120 121 179 181 182 185 183 186 189 190 191 192 172 173 198 199 197 196 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 192A 173B 142B 138B 135A 122A G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 PAD 181.0 PAD 170.0 PAD 170.0 PAD 170.5 PAD 173.5 PAD 173.5PAD 176.5PAD 178.0 PAD 181.0 PAD 184.0 BIO 163.30 ACCESS DRIVE TYPICAL SECTION SCALE: 1"=5' A - 42' MINIMUM ESMT P/L 10' TRAVEL 8' PARKING 9.5'NEIGHBOR20' WIDE FIRE LANE 10' TRAVEL ESMT 4.5' GRAYSON ROAD FRONTAGE SCALE: 1"=5' B -PROJECTGRAYSON ROADP/L 21'± EP No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 20' VTM-2 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN PRELIMINARY GRADING, *TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE: TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SITE INLETS (EXCLUDES C.3 TREATMENT POND OUTLET STRUCTURE. G R A Y S O N R O A D No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-3 WATER CONTROL PLAN HYDROLOGY AND STORM C.3 FLOW-THROUGH PLANTER - 1 NATIVE SOIL COMPACTED @ 85% MIN R.C. 24"x24" STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN 12" DRAIN ROCK LAYER 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40 PERF PIPE; FACE PERFORATIONS DOWNWARD. 6" MIN 18" LOAMY SAND PER CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK APPENDIX B. NO LINER 3:1 MAX. RIDGE ELEV. OUT 2" MIN 40ml HDPE POND LINER OR APPROVED EQUAL FINISH GRADE GRATE ELEV. BASE ELEV. CLASS II PERMEABLE, CALTRANS SPEC. 68-1.025 LANDSCAPE PLANTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK APPENDIX B. NOTE: REFER TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE HANDBOOK CHAPTER 4 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERS. C.3 TREATMENT SIZING CALCULATIONS DETENTION SIZING CALCULATIONS GGFFE E D D C C B B AAG R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460 ±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SF LOT 8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF TOEOFCREEKBANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK81.49CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK94.03CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.41CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.80CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1TOEOFCREEKBANK91.30CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5:1No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 1" = 40' VTM-4 SETBACK EXHIBIT CREEK STRUCTURE No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 N.T.S. VTM-5 TREE INVENTORY ARBORIST REPORT No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 REVISIONS Date: Job No.: By: Scale: #DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTON C McALLISTER - PE 61148 / PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/22 (PE) 03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 01/28/22 EM/mm 19300 N.T.S. VTM-6 TREE INVENTORY ARBORIST REPORT G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 PLAN 1 LOT 2 PLAN 3 LOT 3 PLAN 3 LOT 4 PLAN 2 LOT 5 PLAN 1LOT 6 PLAN 3 LOT 7 PLAN 3 LOT 8 PLAN 3 LOT 9 PLAN 2 LOT 10 PLAN 3 1" = 20' VTM-7 BUILDING LAYOUT CONCEPTUAL No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 Date: Job No.: By: Scale: 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COM 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 03/25/22 EM 19300 * *-Affordable unit for Moderate Income Household 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD PLEASANT HILL, CA © 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021351 | 12-15-21 Conceptual Streetscene A1 NTS Plan 2 | Modern Farmhouse (R)Plan 1 | Modern FarmhousePlan 2 | Modern Prairie Plan 3 | Modern Prairie (R) A91024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 0 4 8 16 V A L L E YVALLEYV A L L E YVVALLEY VALLEYVALLEYRIDGE RIDGERIDGERIDGEPITCH BREAK5:12 5:12 5:125:128:128:128:128:124:126:126:12VALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEYRIDGERIDGERIDGE RIDGERIDGE 4:12 4:12 4:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:12 VALLEYVALLEYV A L L E Y VALLEYHI PHIPHI P HI P HI P HI P HIPHIPHIPHHIPHIPHIPRIDGE RIDGERRIDGERHI P 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:124:124:124:124:124:124:12 4:12 4:124:12| 2021205 | 04-12-22C 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA. 730 MINERT ROAD SITE WALNUT CREEK, CA 0 2 4 8 A2.2 PLAN 2 Roof Plan Elevation AElevation C Modern FarmhouseSpanish Colonial Elevation B Modern Prairie A81024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-2224682468 POWDER 9'-0" CLG. H.S.308016'-0" x 8'-0" SECT. GAR. DOOR 286824686050 SL 6050 SL GREAT ROOM 13'-0" CLG. H.S. 17'-0" x 18'-2" DINING 9'-0" CLG. H.S. KITCHEN 9'-0" CLG. H.S. PANTRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S.UP3050SH 3050SHFX6050 3050 SH3050SH 3080FR. DOORT.G. 3050 SH 3050 SH 2-CAR GARAGE 20'-2" x 20'-4" DEN / OPT. BDRM. 3 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 11'-8" x 12'-11" PORCH DROP 9'-0" CLG. H.S. ENTRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 2880 43'-6"1'-8"2'-2"17'-5"4'-0"12'-9" 38'-0" 20'-9" 38'-0" 17'-3"43'-6"38'-0"5'-6"8'-2" x 16'-8" 9'-6" x 14'-8" 2668 PR.3050SHSTOR.2668BI-PASS6068 DN2050SH 3050SH4050 SL 3050 SH 3050 SH BDRM. 3 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 11'-8" x 12'-0"2468246824682668BI-PASS60683050SH286824682040SH3068 2468W.I.C. 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 27'-0" L.P. OWNER BDRM. 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 14'-0" x 16'-10"2040SH3050 SH 3050 SH3050SH 2050SH2050SH2050SH2050SHOWNER BATH 9'-0" CLG. H.S. BDRM. 2 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 10'-6" x 11'-2" BATH 2 9'-0" CLG. H.S. LAUNDRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S. 3050 SH 3050 SH 2040 SH LOFT 9'-0" CLG. CARPET 13'-0" x 13'-0"2040SH39'-0"6'-8"13'-91 2"12'-3"5'-31 2" 38'-0" 25'-0" 38'-0" 13'-0"43'-6"35'-8"5'-6"2'-4"4'-6"43'-6"| 2021205 | 04-12-22C 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA. 730 MINERT ROAD SITE WALNUT CREEK, CA 0 2 4 8 A2.1 PLAN 2 2,498 SF 3 Bdrm|3 Bath|Loft|Den 2-Car Garage Second Floor 1,420 SF First Floor 1,078 SF A101024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 Color Scheme 1 Color Scheme 3Color Scheme 6 A111024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 EXTERIOR MATERIALS:Elevation A - Color Scheme 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 10 CONCRETE SLATE TILE ROOFING INSULATED VINYL WINDOWS FIBERGLASS FRONT DOOR STUCCO STUCCO OVER FOAM TRIM FIBER CEMENT BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING FIBER CEMENT TRIM MANUFACTURED STONE VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE CAP FASCIA SECTIONAL ROLL-UP GARAGE DOOR LIGHT FIXTURE 6 4 3 5 8 9 2 11 12 10 71 11 12 A121024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 EXTERIOR MATERIALS:Elevation B - Color Scheme 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 CONCRETE 'S' TILE ROOFING INSULATED VINYL WINDOWS FIBERGLASS FRONT DOOR STUCCO STUCCO OVER FOAM TRIM DECORATIVE CERAMIC TILE FASCIA SECTIONAL ROLL-UP GARAGE DOOR DECORATIVE METAL LIGHT FIXTURE10 6 3 5 9 4 2 8 10 7 9 1 A131024-1026 Grayson Rd PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 © 2022 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2021205 | 04-12-22 EXTERIOR MATERIALS:Elevation C - Color Scheme 6 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 CONCRETE SHAKE TILE ROOFING INSULATED VINYL WINDOWS FIBERGLASS FRONT DOOR STUCCO STUCCO OVER FOAM TRIM MANUFACTURED BRICK VENEER & CAP FASCIA SECTIONAL ROLL-UP GARAGE DOOR LIGHT FIXTURE9 3 5 6 2 4 8 9 7 1 3050 SH3050SH 16'-0" x 8'-0" SECT. GAR. DOOR 3080FR. DOORPR.T.G.3050SH3050SH2040SH3050SH3050SH30SC8016 50 SH 3050 SH FX6050 FX40502050SH 2050 SH TEMP. GL. SLIDER80602868 20'-0" x 21'-3"68242480286824802480 2480268018'-0" x 17'-0" 3050 SH3050SH 13'-0" x 11'-0" 12'-10" x 10'-4" 10'-0" x 18'-4" 2040 SH 7'-0"65'-0"48'-0"10'-0"10'-0"18'-6" 45'-0" 12'-6" 13'-7"6'-6"16'-11"7'-0"2'-0"2050SH6'-0"65'-0"45'-0" 14'-0"48'-0"UP 12'-2" x 24'-2" 1-CAR TANDEM GARAGE POWDER 9'-0" CLG. H.S. BDRM. 5 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BATH 3 9'-0" CLG. H.S. DEN 9'-0" CLG. CARPET GREAT ROOM 9'-0" CLG. H.S. DINING 9'-0" CLG. H.S. KITCHEN 9'-0" CLG. H.S. PANTRY 9'-0" CLG. OPT. CALIF. RM. 2-CAR GARAGE 2480 3050 SH 3050 SH3050SH3050SH 3050 SH BI-PASS8080BI-PASS608026802480 BI-PASS50802480268030803050 SH 3050 SH FX3050 14'-0" x 19'-6" FX3050 3050 SH 2040SH26803050SH3050 SH 3050 SH 2680 14'-0" x 17'-4" 11'-9" x 11'-3" 12'-2" x 13'-4"2050SH2050SH2040SH2880 35'-0" L.P. 5050 SL2040SH 11'-0" x 12'-10"2050SH3050SH3050SH2050SHDN BDRM. 2 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BATH 2 9'-0" CLG. H.S. BDRM. 3 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BDRM. 4 9'-0" CLG. CARPET BONUS RM 9'-0" CLG. H.S. LAUNDRY 9'-0" CLG. H.S. MAIN BDRM. 9'-0" CLG. CARPET MAIN BATH 9'-0" CLG. H.S. W.I.C. 9'-0" CLG. CARPET | 2021351 | 11-24-21C 2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA. 1024 & 1026 Grayson Road PLEASANT HILL, CA 0 2 4 8 PLAN 3 3,277 SF 5 Bdrm|3.5 Bath|Den|Bonus Room 3-Car Tandem Garage A3.01 Second Floor 1,678 SF First Floor 1,481 SF Traverso Tree Service Phone: 925-930-7901 • 4080 Cabrilho Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 • Fax: 925-723-2442 May 6, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) Andy Byde Calibr Ventures bydeandy@gmail.com RE: Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road Project Summary This report updates the 2006 arborist report with current tree assessment and measurements, and anticipated tree impact. Trees proposed for removal are estimated based on proposed grading and building footprints. Actual impacts may vary once homes are designed. A supplemental arborist report may be necessary at that time. This 10/17/22 revision adds 13 trees (#301-313) along the creek that were omitted in prior reports. The scope of work did not include review of updated plans and health/structure reassessment of other trees, though the locations of a few trees were adjusted. Site Summary A total of 130 trees > 6” in diameter were inventoried. It is my opinion that 97 trees will need to be removed to accommodate the proposed project. The remaining trees can be retained given that the protection measures within this report are followed. Assumptions & Limitations This report is based on my site visit on 5/4/20 & 10/11/22, and existing conditions & demolition plan by Debolt Civil Engineering dated 3/9/22 (plot date 10/13/22). It was assumed that the trees and the proposed improvements were accurately surveyed. Several trees were not surveyed or appear to be located incorrectly, so I roughly located them on the tree protection plan based on their proximity to adjacent surveyed trees. Since it was difficult to tell which trees were accurately located, the approximate locations will likely need to be resurveyed if precision is needed. The health and structure of the trees were assessed visually from ground level. No drilling, root excavation, or aerial inspections were performed. Internal or non-detectable defects may exist and could lead to part or whole tree failures. Due to the dynamic nature of trees and their environment, it is not possible for arborists to guarantee that trees will not fail in the future. Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 2 Tree Inventory & Assessment Table #s: Each tree was given a square metal tag with numbers ranging from 102-206 & circular tags from #301-313. (Note: as of 2022, tags are likely engulfed by trunk growth.) Trees with letters attached (a, b, or c) were new young trees that have grown up to protected size since the 2006 inventory. Their locations are shown on the attached the tree inventory plan. DBH (Diameter at Breast Height): Trunk diameters in inches were measured at 4.5’ above average grade with a diameter tape. Height of measurement may deviate slightly from the standard on atypical trunks. Health & Structural Condition Rating Dead: Dead or declining past chance of recovery. Poor (P): Stunted or declining canopy, poor foliar color, possible disease or insect issues. Severe structural defects that may or may not be correctable. Usually not a reliable specimen for preservation. Fair (F): Fair to moderate vigor. Minor structural defects that can be corrected. More susceptible to construction impacts than a tree in good condition. Good (G): Good vigor and color, with no obvious problems or defects. Generally more resilient to impacts. Very Good (VG): Exceptional specimen with excellent vigor and structure. Unusually nice. Dripline: Canopy radius was visually estimated in each cardinal direction. Age Young (Y): Within the first 20% of expected life span. High resiliency to encroachment. Mature (M): Between 20% - 80% of expected life span. Moderate resiliency to encroachment. Overmature (OM): In >80% of expected life span. Low resiliency to encroachment. DE: Dripline Encroachment (X indicates encroachment) CI: Anticipated Construction Impact (L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High) Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 3 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 101 Coast live oak This tree no longer exists. Old report stated it as a 9” tree. No evidence of a stump was found. N/A 102 Valley oak 16 G-F G 20 25 20 20 Y X M Epicormic sprouts along scaffold branches. Within west p/l set back, some grading will likely occur within dripline. Save Set protection fencing at dripline (d/l), and have arborist on site for any d/l encroachment. 103 Fruiting pear 10, 5, 5, 4, 4 P P 10 0 10 10 OM X H Declining tree. In proposed driveway Remove 104 Valley oak 18, 19, 20, 12 G G 30 30 30 30 M X H Co-dominant stems at 3'. In proposed driveway. Remove 105 Coast live oak 11, 7, 6 F-P F 15 15 10 0 M X H Co-dominant stems. Understory tree. Within building footprint. Remove 106 Valley oak 11, 12 G F 25NW-W M X H Co-dominant stems. Within building footprint. Remove 107 Valley oak 4, 3, 12, 11, 5, 7, 5 G F 25 0 18 25 M X H Basal shoot from old stump. In proposed driveway. Within building footprint. Remove 107 B Coast live oak 11, 5, 8 F P 15 0 0 25 M X H Growing out from base of #107. Co-dominant trunks. Within building footprint. Remove 108 Coast live oak 17 F F 25NW-W M X H Curved trunk. Within building footprint. Remove 109 Valley oak 12, 11, 7, 6 F F 30N M X H One sided tree to the N/W. Dieback & epicormic sprouting. Within building footprint. Remove 110 Valley oak 20, 11, 11, 16 G F 25 25 0 25 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within building footprint. Remove 111 Coast live oak 19 F-P F 20 25 20 20 M X H Bark inclusion on all 3 attachments. Sparse with stunted growth. Within building footprint. Remove 112 Coast live oak 11 F P 0 6 10 10 Y X H Top broken at 12' with sprouting. Within building footprint. Remove 113 Valley oak 7 F P 6S Y X H Sparse canopy, 2 trunks removed. Within building footprint. Remove 114 Valley oak 7, 4 F F 6 6 6 6 Y X H Crowded. Within building footprint. Remove 115 Coast live oak 13 G G 12 0 8 10 Y X H 3" from base of #116; crowded. Within building footprint. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 4 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 116 Valley oak 7, 6 F F 18N Y X H Very crowded. Co-dominant trunks; sweeping lean to N. Within building footprint. Remove 117 Coast live oak 17 F-P F-P 15NE M L Sparse understory tree. Outside of grading limits. Save 118 Valley oak 14, 18 F F 15 15 20 20 M L Co-dominant stem bends to N. Outside of grading limits. Save 119 Coast live oak 17 Dead Remove. 120 Coast live oak 17 F-P F 10 10 10 10 M L Ivy covering trunk. In decline; sycamore borer damage. Treat for Borer. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 121 Valley oak 13 F F 20S Y L Ivy covering trunk. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 122 Valley oak 22 P P 25N M L Ivy covering trunk. Declining canopy; sweeping lean to N. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 122 A Coast live oak 30 F F 50N M L In creek structure setback. Significant lean to N. Ivy covering trunk. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 123 Valley oak 14, 7, 7, 10, 10 F F 0 25 0 15 M X H Sparse canopy. Co-dominant stems at 6'. Within grading limits Remove 124 Valley oak 16 F G 15 20 15 8 M X H Tag embedded in trunk. Epicormic sprouts. Within grading limits Remove 124 B Coast live oak 7 F P 6 10 4 0 Y X H 90° correcting bend in trunk. Within grading limits Remove 125 Chinese pistache 27 G G 25 25 25 25 OM X H Dieback; slightly drought stressed. Within grading limits Remove 126 Chinese pistache 17, 17, 10, 8 F G 25 25 25 6 OM X H Within grading limits Remove 127 Coast live oak 17 G G 15 0 0 20 M X H Within grading limits Remove 128 Valley oak 19 G F 20 25 0 20 M X H Within grading limits Remove 129 Valley oak 14 G F 0 20 20 20 Y X H Within grading limits Remove 130 Coast live oak 16 F G 15 15 10 0 Y X H Sparse lower canopy. Within grading limits Remove 131 Calif. Buckeye 11, 8 F F 15 20 25 20 M X H Dead lower/interior canopy. Within grading limits Remove 131 B Valley oak 18 F F 35N M X H Not surveyed. 35° lean to N. Ivy and poison oak covering trunk. Within grading limits Remove 132 Coast live oak 11 F F 40N Y X H 10° lean to N. Tag engulfed by trunk. Within grading limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 5 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 133 Coast live oak 14 G F 40N-20NW Y X H 10° lean to N. Within grading limits Remove 134 Monterey pine 50 P F 50 50 50 50 OM X M Over mature tree, in declining years. Sparse canopy. Removed 135 Coast redwood 18, 18, 10 F G 20 20 20 20 M X H Drought stressed, needs irrigation. Within grading limits. Remove 135 A Calif. Buckeye 6, 8, 11, 7, 7, 9, 11, 8 G G 20 20 20 20 M L Within creek structure set back. ~3 trunk clusters treated as one. Save 136 Silver dollar eucalyptus (Eucalyptus cinerea) 13, 16 F F 25 15 10 0 M X H Failed trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 137 Coast live oak 40 G-F P 35 35 35 35 M X M- H Ivy covering trunk. Co-dominant stems at 4' with included bark. Grading just north of trunk proposed. Pull grade limits at least 15’ from trunk in order to save tree. Save If grading can be adjusted. 138 Valley oak 18 F F 15 15 5 0 M X M- H Ivy covering trunk. Grading just north of trunk. Recommend pulling grade limits at least 10’ from trunk. Save If grading can be adjusted 138 B Buckeye 17, 12, 13, 14, 15, 13, 12, 10, 10, 13 F-P/P F 20 20 20 20 M L In creek structure setback. Top dieback. Save 139 Mimosa Dead Within grading limits. Remove 140 Coast live oak 17 G G 18 18 18 18 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 141 Coast live oak 9 G G 10 10 10 10 Y X H Tag embedded in trunk but readable. Within grading limits. Remove 142 Coast live oak 19, 20 G F 30 30 10 10 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within grading limits. Remove 142 B Coast live oak 20 G F 30 0 0 20 M X H In creek structure setback. Within grading limits. Remove 142 C Coast live oak 14 G G 20 15 0 0 Y X H Not surveyed. 143 Valley oak 15 G-F G 12 12 12 12 Y X H Ivy on trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 144 Valley oak 11 G F 15SE Y X H Ivy on trunk. Understory tree. Within grading limits. Remove 145 Coast live oak 22 G-F G 25 20 18 20 M X H Ivy on trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 146 Coast live oak 18, 15 G F 25 0 20 25 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within grading limits. Remove 147 Fruiting plum Dead X H Within grading limits. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 6 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 148 Persimmon 6, 7 G P 6 15SE 5 M X H Leaders poorly attached, breaking apart. Within grading limits. Remove 149 Black Walnut 7, 6 G F 8 15 15 0 Y X H Within grading limits. Remove 149 B Valley oak 7 G F 25NE Y X H Not surveyed. Within grading limits. Remove 150 Coast live oak 19 G F 0 25 20 20 M X H One stem topped by PG&E, Poor location. Within grading limits. Remove 151 Coast live oak 15 F-P P 25N-NE 0 20 Y X H Topped by PG&E. Sparse canopy and deadwood. Within proposed driveway Remove 152 Coast live oak 15 G F 10 15 0 0 Y X H Sided by PG&E. Within proposed driveway. Remove 153 Valley oak 20, 15 G F 10 25 30 30 M X H Somewhat lions tailed, branches elongated to S. Within grading and sewer easement. Remove 154 Valley oak 13 G G-F 10 0 20 20 Y X M- H 1' from existing gravel driveway. Trunk buried. At edge grading limits. Arborist on site for grading. Save Arborist to pull fill back from base of tree. 155 Coast live oak 11 G F 8 12 15 0 Y X H Topped by PG&E. Within proposed driveway. Remove 156 Coast live oak 9 G F 6 8 6 0 Growing up under PG&E wires. Within proposed driveway. Remove 157 Coast live oak 10 G F 10 0 10 18 Y X L Off-site. Trunk buried. 1.5' from existing gravel driveway. Grading at edge of dripline. Save Arborist to pull fill back from base of tree. 158 Chinese pistache 12 F F 15 12 0 10 M X H Partially topped. Within grading for road. Remove 159 Coast live oak 8 G F-P 12NW Y X L Off-site. Trunk buried. Sided by PG&E. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 160 Valley oak 7 G F 8 8 0 0 Y X L Off-site. Co-dominant stems at 7'. Topped by PG&E. Trunk buried. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 160 B Coast live oak 7 G F 15N-NE Y X L Off-site; not surveyed. Lean to NE. 6" NW of #160. . Grading at edge of dripline. Save 161 Iron bark euc. 11, 7 Previously removed. Suspect by PG&E (under wires) N/A 162 Coast live oak 15, 11 G P 15 15 15 15 M X L Topped by PG&E, co-dominant stems. Grading for road at edge of dripline. Save 163 Coast live oak 11 G G 6 6 6 6 Y X L Reduced by PG&E. Grading at edge of dripline Save 164 Incense cedar 15 F F 7 7 7 7 M X H Sweeping S shaped trunk. Within proposed road. Remove 165 Incense cedar Removed. N/A 166 Coast live oak 19, 20 G-F F 30 30 30 0 M X H Co-dominant stems. Moderate sycamore borer. Within grading limits. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 7 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 166 B Siberian elm 7, 11 F-P P 18 0 0 18 M X H Not surveyed. Co-dominant stems at 2'. Within grading limits. Remove 166 C Siberian elm 9, 8, 7 P P 20 0 0 20 M X H Not surveyed. Basal sprouts; decay. Within grading limits. Remove 167 Black walnut 9, 4, 4 F F 20 0 0 20 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 168 Black walnut 8 P P 20NW Y X H Understory tree; no growth in past 14 years. Within grading limits. Remove 169 Coast live oak 20 G F 35 20 20 20 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 169 B Coast live oak 9 G F 30NW Y X H Not surveyed. Understory tree. 40° phototropic lean to NW. Within grading limits. Remove 170 Coast live oak 14 G G 8 8 8 8 Y X H Trunk buried. Within grading limits. Remove 171 Coast live oak 14 F-P F 35N-NW Y X H Ivy around base, upper branches are damaged by a fungal canker at 15'. On creek bank well. Within grading limits. Remove 171 B Coast live oak 14 G G 35NW Y X H In creek structure setback. 40° lean to NW. Within grading limits. Remove 172 Monterey pine 48 F-P F-P 30 30 30 30 OM X H 5° lean to N/W. Grading up to base of tree. Only 3-5 years of anticipated lifespan left. Remove 173 Calif. Buckeye 14, 14, 8, 8, 8, 7, 7, 5 G F 35 20 0 20 M X M- H Low branching (trunks laying on ground). Grading limits well within N/W dripline. Pull grade limits back so 15’ from trunk. Save Assuming grade limits can be adjusted. 173 B Calif. Buckeye 11, 12 G F 10 10 10 10 M L In creek structure setback. Ivy covering tree. Save 173 C Coast live oak 8 F P 25N Y X L- M Understory tree with heavy lean (trunk horizontal before correcting) to NW. Young tree with some dripline grading encroachment. Save 174 Black walnut 23 F-P F 20 20 20 25 M X H Low branching, old mistletoe in canopy; dieback. Within grade limits. Remove 175 Siberian elm 17, 17, 15 P P 20 20 20 20 M X H Tree in decline, poorly structured. Within grade limits. Remove 176 Coast redwood 30 F/F-P G 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought-stressed. Within grade limits. Remove 177 Coast redwood 26 F/F-P G 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought-stressed. Within grade limits. Remove 177 B Valley oak 11 G G 8 8 8 8 Y X H Not surveyed. Chain on trunk. Within grade limits. Remove 178 Valley oak 14, 6 G F 15 15 20 20 Y X H Lean to SW. Within grade limits. Remove 178 B Valley oak 8 G F 12 12 0 0 Y Not surveyed. Within grade limits. Remove 179 Calif. Buckeye 8, 7, 6 G G 12 12 12 12 M X H Within grade limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 8 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 180 Mulberry 18 P P 0 10 10 0 OM X H Previously topped. Within grade limits. Remove 181 Valley oak 11 F F 15NE-NW Y L Grading just outside dripline. Save 182 Valley oak 11 F F 15S Y X L- M Grading at edge of dripline. Save 183 Valley oak 13 F F 20 NE 15 0 0 Y X L- M Grading at edge of dripline. Save 184 Black walnut 8, 8, 7 P P 8 8 8 8 M X H Declining health. Within grade limits. Remove 185 Valley oak 11 F F 18 NE 10 0 0 Y X L- M S shaped trunk. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 186 Calif. Buckeye 7, 7, 6, 6, 5, 5, 5 G G 18 18 18 18 M X M Tangled with mulberry, and walnut. Grading withn dripline. Save Arborist on site during grading. 187 Mulberry 18 P P 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought stressed, tangled with buckeye. Within grading limits. Remove 188 Black walnut 9 F F 20S Y X H Competing with buckeye, recommend removal. Within grade limits. Remove 188 B Coast live oak 11 F G 12 12 12 12 Y X H Not surveyed. Within storm treatment area. Remove 188 C Coast live oak 11 G G 6 0 10 15 Y X H Not surveyed. Within storm treatment area. Remove 189 Calif. Buckeye 9, 9, 8, 7, 7, 5, 5, 5, 3, 3, 3 G G 15 20 25 20 M X L- M Grading limits at edge of dripline. Save 190 Mulberry 16 Dead Remove. 191 Coast live oak 14 G G 10 10 10 10 Y L Grade limits just outside dripline. Save 191 B Coast live oak 11, 9 F F 18NE-NW M L Not surveyed. Lean over road. Save 192 Mulberry 19 P P 8 8 8 8 OM X H Drought stressed. In decline. Within grade limits. Remove 192 A Coast live oak 17 G F 18 NE 10 10 18 NW M L In creek structure setback. Reduced by PG&E. By street, lifting asphalt curb. Save 192 B Willow 20, 20 P P 15 0 0 0 OM L Outside northeast property corner along Grayson. Topped by PG&E; sparse canopy. Recommend removal Remove 192 C Willow 24 F P 0 0 25 30 SW OM L Outside northeast property corner along Grayson. Uprooted to S. Fallen tree. Remove 193 Siberian elm 12, 12, 10, 5, 5, 4 P P 8 8 8 8 M X H Dying tree. Within grading limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 9 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 194 Siberian elm 12, 9, 4 P P 0 15 15 15 M X H Dying tree. Within grade limits. Remove 194 B Coast live oak 9 G F 15N Y X H Not surveyed. Up against elm. Remove 195 Siberian elm 13, 4 P P 20N M X H Declining health. Within grade limits. Remove 196 Coast live oak 19 G F 20 NW 0 20 20 M L Sweeping trunk Save 197 Bush eucalyptus 10, 8, 8 Dead M L Dead/failed. Fire hazard. Remove 198 Bush eucalyptus 15, 15 P P 10N M L Dying, fire hazard. Remove 199 Blue gum euc. 50 F F-P 25 20 20 20 M L 10" branch failure to N in 2006; minor sprouting from failure. Prune for safety if targets within 50ft. Save 200 Bush eucalyptus 18, 5, 6 F P 15S M L Declining health. Recent failures. Prune for safety. Save 201 Monterey pine 24 F P 20 20 20 20 OM L Over mature tree, badly included co-dominant stems. Anticipate short life span, recommend removal. Remove 202 Monterey pine 22 P P 0 20 20 0 OM L Over mature tree, declining health. Recommend removal. Remove 203 Monterey pine Removed. N/A 204 Monterey pine 18 F P 25E M L Poorly tapered trunk; lean to E. Recommend removal. Remove 205 Monterey pine Removed. N/A 206 Calif. Buckeye 15, 15, 10, 10 G G 25 25 25 25 M L Healthy tree. Save 301 Calif. Buckeye 10, 10 G G-F 8 12 10 12 M X H Co-dominant trunks. In proposed grading. Remove. 302 Coast live oak 9 F/F-P F-P 25N- 20NE Y X H Dominated by poison oak and ivy. In proposed grading. Remove. 303 Valley oak 19 G-F F 25N M X H Corrected phototropic lean (about 20’ above grade). Slightly sparse canopy. Ivy & poison oak dominating lower trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 304 Coast live oak 20 G F 15 6 10 25 M X H Ivy climbing trunk. Canopy in upper half. In proposed grading. Remove. 305 Valley oak 19.5 F-P/P F-P 25N M X H Dead secondary stem at base, branches dead to very top. Remaining canopy sparse & stunted with deadwood. In proposed grading. Remove. 306 Valley oak 12 P P 30N M- OM X H Lower branches dead. Remaining canopy very sparse and stunted, concentrated at top of tree about 15’ N of trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 307 Coast live oak 24 G G-F 20 20 15 15 M X H Ivy climbing trunk. Trunk has slight kink to E at 6’ but has reoriented vertically. Canopy in upper half of tree. In proposed grading. Remove. Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 10 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 308 Coast live oak 13, 16, 7 G-F F/F-P 30N M X H Multiple co-dominant trunks. Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/4. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 309 Coast live oak 11 G-F F-P 25N Y-M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/6. In proposed grading. In proposed grading. Remove. 310 Coast live oak 10 F P 0 0 8 12 Y-M X H 1/3 canopy dead, remaining branch extends to W. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 311 Coast live oak 21 F F 30N M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/3, slightly corrected lean In proposed grading. Remove. 312 Coast live oak 28 G-F F/F-P 30N M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/4. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 313 Valley oak 9 F-P F 30NW Y X H Phototropic lean to NW, ivy. In proposed grading. Remove. Tree Encroachment Summary A total of 130 trees were inventoried. At least four additional trees (#101, 134, 203 & 205) that were shown on the survey were removed since the original site visit. • Trees that will need to be removed: #’s 103-116, 119, 123-135, 136, 139-153, 155-156, 158, 164, 166-172, 174-180, 184, 187-188c, 190, 192, 192b-195, 197, 198, 201-201, 301-313 (97 trees) • Trees to be saved that will be subjected to dripline encroachment, and will need arborist supervision during grading within driplines: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189 (17 trees) • Additional trees to be saved that will not have dripline encroachment: #’s 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 122a, 135a, 173a, 181, 191, 191b, 192a, 196, 199, 200, 266 (16 trees) Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 11 Tree Protection Recommendations (to be printed on site plans) Pre- Grading Phase • Remove trees #103-116, 119, 123-135, 136, 139-153, 155-156, 158, 164, 166-172, 174- 180, 184, 187-188c, 190, 192, 192b-195, 197, 198, 201-201, 301-313 (97 trees) • Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. • Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. • TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase • The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. • Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. • If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. • Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. • Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. • Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase (if applicable) • The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. • Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. • Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. • Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. • All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. • All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak- compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 12 Thank you for the opportunity to provide this report, and please do not hesitate to contact me if there are any questions or concerns. Please see attached tree inventory plan. Sincerely, John C Traverso ISA Board Certified Master Arborist #WE0206-B ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified TCIA Certified Tree Care Safety Professional #01802 (10/17/22 Revision by Jennifer Tso Board Certified Master Arborist #WE-10270B ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified) Contra Costa County–Grayson Road Residential Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix B: Biological Resources Supporting Information THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE GRAYSON ROAD PROPERTY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Calibr Ventures 1908 Cambridge Place Walnut Creek, CA 94598 Prepared by: OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Wetland Regulatory Consultants 3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260 San Ramon, California 94583 Phone: (925) 866-2111 ~ Fax: (925) 866-2126 E-mail: jeff@olberdingenv.com Contact: Jeff Olberding February 2022 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 LOCATION .......................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION............................................................................................... 4 4.0 REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................................. 5 4.1 Federal Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................... 5 4.1.1 Plants and Wildlife ............................................................................................ 5 4.1.2 Wetlands/Waters ............................................................................................... 7 4.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ................................................................................ 8 4.1.4 Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ................................................ 9 4.2 State Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Plants and Wildlife ............................................................................................ 9 4.2.2 Wetlands/Waters ............................................................................................. 10 4.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act ............................................................ 11 4.2.4 Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance – Chapter 816-6 - Tree Protection And Preservation Ordinance ................................................................................... 11 4.2.5 Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance – Chapter 914 – Rights-of- Ways and Setbacks ......................................................................................... 13 5.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................ 14 5.1 Soils Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 16 5.2 Plant Survey Methods ........................................................................................................ 16 5.2.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources .......................................................... 16 5.2.2 Field Surveys .................................................................................................. 17 5.3 Wildlife Survey Methods ................................................................................................... 17 5.3.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources .......................................................... 17 5.3.2 Field Surveys .................................................................................................. 17 6.0 RESULTS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................. 18 6.1 Soil Evaluation Results ...................................................................................................... 18 6.2 Plant Survey Results ........................................................................................................... 20 6.2.1 Floristic Inventory and Habitat Characterization ............................................ 20 6.3 Wildlife Survey Results ...................................................................................................... 24 6.3.1 General Wildlife Species and Habitats ........................................................... 24 7.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 34 7.1 Wetlands/Waters ................................................................................................................ 34 7.2 Special-status Plants ........................................................................................................... 35 7.3 Special-status Wildlife ....................................................................................................... 35 8.0 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................. 36 9.0 LITERATURE CITED ....................................................................................................... 41 iii LIST OF ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Map Figure 2 Vicinity Map Figure 3 USGS Topographic Map Figure 4 Aerial Map Figure 5 CNDDB Wildlife Occurrences within 5 miles Figure 6 CNDDB Plant Occurrences within 5 miles Figure 7 USFWS Critical Habitat Figure 8 Soils Map Figure 9 Photo Location Map Figure 10 Habitat Map Figure 11 Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank ATTACHMENT 2 SITE PLANS ATTACHMENT 3 TABLES Table 1 Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Table 2 Special-Status Species Occurring Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area ATTACHMENT 4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS This report should be cited as: Olberding Environmental, Inc. February 2022. Biological Resources Analysis Report for the Grayson Road Property, Contra Costa County, California. Prepared for Calibr Ventures. 1 SUMMARY On April 6, 2021, Olberding Environmental, Inc. conducted a field reconnaissance survey of the Grayson Road Property (Property) for the purpose of identifying sensitive plant and wildlife species and sensitive habitats potentially occurring on the Property. The Property surveyed is comprised of approximately 3.05 acres located in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California (Attachment 1, Figures 1-2). Results of the initial reconnaissance survey indicate that the Property contains waters that might be considered jurisdictional by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The southern boundary of the Property is bordered by Grayson Creek, a perennial creek that flows northeast from its origin in Briones Regional Park. The creek flows through a riparian woodland corridor located on the southern portion of the Property. Water was present in the entire length of Grayson Creek bordering the Property during the April 2021 survey. The Project as proposed does not include any improvements within Grayson Creek, and the residential development will be set back from the creek in accordance with the Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance (Title 9, Chapter 914). A query of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) showed that four special-status plant species have a potential to occur on the Property. Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), Diablo helianthella (Helianthella castanea), Mount Diablo fairy-lantern (Calochortus pulchellus), and bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris) were identified as having a potential to occur on the Property based on the presence of suitable habitat for these species and CNDDB occurrences located within the vicinity of the Property. The April 2021 survey of the Property performed during the blooming period for three of these species (Diablo helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy lantern, bent-flowered fiddleneck) did not find any of these species present on the Property and they are presumed absent from the Property. Although the April 2021 survey was performed outside of the identified blooming period for Congdon’s tarplant (June-November), remnant plants would have been observed if they were present. For these reasons Congdon’s tarplant is presumed absent from the Property. A total of five bird species were identified to have a moderate to high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting or foraging capacity. The red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) all have a high potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. The sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) and American kestrel (Falco sparverius) have a moderate potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk) were present, and observed foraging on the Property. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed 2 on the Property exhibiting nesting behaviors. Mitigation measures, including preconstruction surveys for nesting passerine birds and raptors prior to performing any construction-related activities such as tree and vegetation removal or grading during the avian nesting season (February through August), will reduce the potential impacts to sensitive bird species to less-than-significant. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF) in the 5-mile radius of the Property. Water was present in Grayson creek during the April 2021 survey which offers suitable habitat for foraging and aquatic dispersal within the creek channel. Various vegetative debris located throughout the riparian corridor habitat provide suitable upland refuge. USFWS designated CRLF critical habitat is located approximately 1.3 miles west of the Property. For these reasons, CRLF has a moderate potential to occur on the Property within the creek channel and riparian habitat in a foraging and dispersal capacity, and the proposed project may have a potentially significant impact on CRLF. However, with the proposed mitigation measures, the project will reduce any potential impacts to less-than-significant. CNDDB listed four occurrences of California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) (CTS) within five miles of the Property. However, all of these occurrences are historical and the species is considered to be extirpated within this area. The Property lacks vernal pools or ponds required for breeding, and is not within dispersal distance of any known or potential breeding habitat. For these reasons, CTS is presumed absent from the Property and the proposed project will not result in any potentially significant impacts to the species. CNDDB listed 13 occurrences of Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) within the 5-mile radius of the Property. Due to the sensitivity of these species, the exact locations of these occurrences are unknown. The Property does not support shrub or rocky outcrop habitat that the whipsnake prefers; thus, making it unlikely that the whipsnake would breed or permanently reside within the Property boundaries. Suitable whipsnake habitat is, however, located within USFWS designated critical habitat for Alameda Whipsnake approximately 0.9 west in Briones Regional Park and the surrounding open space. Although the Property is surrounded by residential development, this would not preclude whipsnake from dispersing through the Property, as areas of open space are also present within the vicinity of the Property. Therefore, Alameda whipsnake could disperse through the Property as it moves to more suitable habitat. For these reasons, there is potential for Alameda whipsnake to occur on the Property, albeit low, in a dispersal capacity only. The mitigation measures presented in section 8.0 will reduce any potential impacts to this species to less-than-significant. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) within the 5-mile radius of the Property. Water was present in Grayson Creek during the April 2021 survey. Therefore, western pond turtle could use the creek channel for foraging and aquatic dispersal and 3 the riparian corridor for terrestrial dispersal. For these reasons, western pond turtle has a moderate potential to occur in the creek channel and riparian habitat in a dispersal capacity only, and the proposed project may have a potentially significant impact on western pond turtle. However, with the proposed mitigation measures, the project will reduce any potential impacts to less-than- significant. No sign of bat use was observed on the Property during the April 2021 survey; however, based on habitat suitability, it was determined that bats have a moderate potential to utilize the developed, mixed woodland, and riparian woodland habitats located within the site in a roosting and foraging capacity. These bat species include: Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis). Mitigation measures, including a preconstruction survey for bats in areas with suitable habitat prior to performing any construction- related activities or timing construction to minimize impacts to bats, will reduce the potential impacts to bat species to less-than-significant. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Olberding Environmental, Inc. prepared this biological resources analysis of the proposed Grayson Road project, located in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California (Figure 1). The purpose of this analysis is to provide a description of existing biological resources on the Property and to identify potentially significant impacts that could occur to sensitive biological resources from the proposed residential development of the Property. Biological resources include common plant and animal species, and special-status plants and animals as designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Biological resources also include “waters of the United States” and “waters of the State”, as regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and California State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB). This analysis included a review of pertinent literature on relevant background information and habitat characteristics of the site. Our review included researching existing information in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) maintained by the CDFW and the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Also included was a review of information related to species of plants and animals that could potentially utilize the described habitats identified on and immediately surrounding the Property. To assist in the assessment, a field reconnaissance investigation of the Property was conducted on April 6, 2021. This report documents the methods, results, and conclusions for the reconnaissance-level survey associated with the biological resources analysis for the Property, and identifies “potentially 4 significant” and “significant impacts” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that could occur to biological resources. Mitigation measures have been developed for all identified significant or potentially significant impacts, and upon implementation would reduce the effects of such impacts to levels regarded as “less than significant” pursuant to CEQA. 2.0 LOCATION The Property is located approximately 3.4 miles north of CA-24 and approximately 2.0 miles west of I-680, on Grayson Road just outside the city limits of Pleasant Hill in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California. Attachment 1, Figure 1 depicts the regional location of the Property in Contra Costa County, and Attachment 1, Figure 2 illustrates the vicinity of the Property in relationship to the City of Pleasant Hill. Attachment 1, Figure 3 identifies the location of the Property on the USGS 7.5 Quadrangle Map for Walnut Creek. An aerial photograph of the Property has been included as Attachment 1, Figure 4. 3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND SETTING The Property encompasses approximately 3.05 acres in an irregular shape and supports four habitat types; mixed woodland, perennial creek, riparian woodland and developed (Attachment 1, Figure 10). Characteristic vegetation of these habitats includes wild oat (Avena fatua), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), buckeye (Aesculus californica) and California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica) trees. The Property has two existing residential structures on site which are surrounded by ornamental and fruit trees including but not limited to black walnut (Juglans nigra) and Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila). Coast live oak trees are also present around the residential homes. The two-story residence is located in the northern portion of the site, while a one-story house is located in the center of the Property. Grayson Creek, a perennial creek flows along the southern boundary of the Property from west to east through a riparian corridor. The topography of the Property consists of relatively flat landscape that slightly slopes from west to east. Elevations of the Property range between 160 feet above sea level near the northeastern boundary and 188 feet above sea level along western boundary. The Property is immediately surrounded by residential development to the north, south, east, and west. Grayson Road exists along the northern boundary of the Property. Briones Regional Park 5 lies approximately 0.9 miles south and west of the Property. Oakmont Memorial Park exists approximately 0.4 miles west of the Property. Dinosaur Hill Park exists approximately 1 mile south of the Property. Grayson Woods Golf Course lies just northwest of the Property on the north side of Grayson Road. 4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project is a 10-unit housing development on the approximately 3.05 acre Property as shown on Attachment 2. The project includes a new access road across the site that would provide access to all lots. A stormwater detention basin will be constructed in the northeast portion of the project site. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. Infrastructure utilities (water, sewer, cable, electrical, etc.) will also be installed for the residential units. Construction of the proposed project would remove 84 trees. The proposed project plans do not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the projects grading limits and Grayson Creek will be set and adhered to as shown on Attachment 2. 5.0 REGULATORY SETTING This section provides a discussion of laws and regulations that regulate native wildlife, fish, plants and aquatic resources. 5.1 Federal Regulatory Setting 5.1.1 Plants and Wildlife The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq., as amended) regulates native plant and animal species, and the listed as Threatened or Endangered under the ESA and designated “critical habitat” for listed species. Listed species are taxa for which proposed and final rules have been published in the Federal Register (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2020). Federal Proposed species (USFWS, 2019) are species for which a proposed listing as Threatened or Endangered under ESA has been published in the Federal Register. Federal Candidate species are defined as “those taxa for which we have on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded by other higher priority listing actions” (USFWS, 2019). Federal Candidate species are not afforded formal protection, although USFWS encourages other federal agencies to give consideration to Candidate species in environmental planning. The pertinent sections of the ESA are: 6 Section 4 (16 USCA §1533): Species listing, Critical Habitat Designation, and Recovery Planning: outlines the procedure for listing endangered plants and wildlife. Section 7 (§1536): Federal Consultation Requirement: imposes limits on the actions of federal agencies that might impact listed species. Section 9 (§1538): Prohibition on Take: prohibits the "taking" of a listed species by anyone, including private individuals, and State and local agencies. Section 10: Exceptions to the Take Prohibition: non-federal agencies can obtain an incidental take permit in connection with the approval of a habitat conservation plan (HCP). The NMFS has jurisdiction over listed marine mammals and anadromous fish, and the USFWS implements the ESA for listed terrestrial species and no anadromous fish species. Below, Sections 9, 7, and 10 of ESA are discussed. Section 9 of ESA as amended, prohibits the “take” of any fish or wildlife species listed under the ESA as endangered. Under federal regulation, “take” of fish or wildlife species listed by the USFWS prior to 2020, or through a special “Section 4(d)” finding for species listed since 2020 or by NMFS as threatened is also prohibited unless otherwise authorized. “Take,” as defined by the ESA, means “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” “Harm” is further defined to include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering" (50 CFR 17.3). A December 2001 decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal in Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association ruled that the USFWS must show that a threatened or endangered species is present on a site and that it would be taken by the project activities. If “take” of a listed species may occur during the course of an otherwise lawful activity, the USFWS and NMFS may authorize take through a Section 7 consultation as discussed further below (for federal actions or private actions that are permitted or funded by a federal agency such as the Corps), or through Section 10 of ESA which requires preparation of a HCP (for state and local agencies, or individuals, and projects without a federal “nexus”; for example, projects that do not need a Corps permit). Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each federal agency consult with the USFWS or NMFS to ensure that any action authorized, funded or carried out by such agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for listed species. The Section 7 consultation process is triggered by a 7 determination made by the federal “action agency” – that is, the federal agency that is carrying out, funding, or approving a project - that the federal action and any interrelated or interdependent actions “may affect” a listed species or designated critical habitat. If an action is likely to adversely affect a listed species or designated critical habitat, formal consultation between the nexus agency and the USFWS/NMFS is required, and the USFWS/NMFS will issue a formal biological opinion assessing whether the proposed action is likely to result in “jeopardy” to a listed species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. If the USFWS/NMFS concludes that a proposed project would not jeopardize a listed species or result in adverse modification of critical habitat, the agency will issue an incidental take statement that allows incidental take of federally listed species. For non-federal entities, for example private parties, cities, counties whose activity does not have a federal nexus (such as a Corps permit) Section 10 provides the mechanism for obtaining take authorization. Under Section 10, a non-federal applicant may obtain an “incidental take permit” from the USFWS or NMFS by preparing an HCP that specifies the impacts that are likely to result to federally-listed species, and the measures the applicant will undertake to minimize and mitigate such impacts, and the funding that will be available to implement those steps. 5.1.2 Wetlands/Waters The federal government, acting through the Corps and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has jurisdiction over all “waters of the United States” as authorized by §404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and §10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 CFR Parts 320-330). Activities that cause the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States require permitting by the Corps. Actions affecting small areas of jurisdictional waters of the United States may qualify for a Nationwide Permit (NWP), provided conditions of the permit are met, such as avoiding impacts to threatened or endangered species or to important cultural sites. Discharges that affect larger areas or which do not meet the conditions of an NWP require an Individual Permit. The process for obtaining an Individual Permit requires a detailed alternatives analysis and development of a comprehensive mitigation/monitoring plan. Waters of the United States are defined as territorial seas and traditionally navigable waters, tributaries, lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters, and adjacent wetlands. Under federal regulation, wetlands are defined as areas that are inundated or saturated by surface of groundwater at a frequency or duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. (33 CFR Part 328.3(c)(16)). Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. In addition, portions of the riparian habitat along a river or stream may be a wetland 8 where the riparian vegetation is at or below the ordinary high water mark and thus also meets the wetland hydrology and hydric soil criteria. Navigable waters include all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tides, including the open ocean, tidal bays, and tidal sloughs. Navigable waters also include some large, non-tidal rivers and lakes, which are important for transportation in commerce. The jurisdictional limit over navigable waters extends laterally to the entire water surface and bed of the waterbody landward to the limits of the mean high tide line. For non-tidal rivers or lakes, which have been designated (by the Corps) to be navigable waters, the limit of jurisdiction along the shoreline is defined by the ordinary high water mark. “Other waters” refer to waters of the United States other than wetlands or navigable waters. Other waters include streams and ponds, which are generally open water bodies and are not vegetated. Other waters can be perennial or intermittent water bodies and waterways. The Corps regulates other waters to the outward limit of the ordinary high water mark. Streams should exhibit a defined channel, bed and banks to be delineated as other waters. The Corps does not generally consider “non-tidal drainage and irrigation ditches excavated on dry land” to be jurisdictional waters of the United States (and such ditches would therefore not be regulated by the Corps (33 CFR Parts 320-330, November 13, 1986). Other areas generally not considered jurisdictional waters include: 1) artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland habitat if the irrigation ceased; 2) artificial lakes and ponds created by excavating and/or diking of dry land to collect and retain water, used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing; 3) waste treatment ponds; 4) ponds formed by construction activities including borrow pits until abandoned; and 5) ponds created for aesthetic reasons such as reflecting or ornamental ponds (33 CFR Part 328.3). However, the preamble also states “the Corps reserves the right on a case-by-case basis to determine that a particular waterbody within these categories” can be regulated as jurisdictional water. The EPA also has authority to determine jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on a case-by-case basis. Riparian habitat that is above the ordinary high water mark and does not meet the three-parameter criteria for a wetland would not be regulated as jurisdictional waters of the United States. 5.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act Raptors are migratory bird species protected by international treaty under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-711). The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed in 50 CFR. Part 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). 9 5.1.4 Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Enacted in 1940, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) provides protection for the bald and golden eagle by “prohibiting the take, possession, sale, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, of any bald or golden eagle, alive or dead, including any part, nest, or egg, unless allowed by permit” (16 U.S.C. 668(a); 50 CFR 22). The BGEPA defines the term “take” to include “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb” if the action is done “knowingly, or with wanton disregard for the consequences” of the action (16 USC 668a,c; 50 CFR 22.3). “Disturb” is defined in 50 CFR 22.3 regulations as “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available: (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.” 5.2 State Regulatory Setting 5.2.1 Plants and Wildlife In 1984, California enacted the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish and Game Code §2050). The basic policy of CESA is to conserve and enhance endangered species and their habitats, and prohibits the unauthorized “take” of CESA listed species and candidates for listing under CESA. The California Code of Regulations (Title 14, §670.5) lists animal species listed as endangered or threatened under CESA. “Take” is defined by Section 86 of the California Fish and Game Code and means “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” Because take under CESA does not include “harm” (see discussion of ESA, above), only activities that would result in the direct take of a CESA-listed species, (e.g., species mortality) is subject to CESA. If an activity will result in take of a state-listed species or state candidate species incidental to an otherwise lawful activity, CDFW may issue an “incidental take” permit pursuant to §2081 of the Fish and Game Code. The CDFW may not issue an incidental take permit for species that are “fully protected” under the fish and game code. These include species protected by the state prior to enacting CESA. See California Fish and Game Code §§ 3505, 3511, 4700, 5050, 5515, and 5517. The CDFW also maintains a list of animal species of special concern (CDFW 2021), most of which are species whose breeding populations in California may face extirpation. Although these species have no legal status, the CDFW recommends considering them during analysis of proposed 10 property impacts to protect declining populations and avoid the need to list them as endangered in the future. Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs. Implementation of the take provisions requires that Property-related disturbance at active nesting territories be reduced or eliminated during critical phases of the nesting cycle (generally February 1 – September 1, annually). Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (e.g., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) or the loss of habitat upon which the birds depend, is considered “taking” and is potentially punishable by fines and/or imprisonment. Such taking would also violate federal law protecting migratory birds (e.g., MBTA). 5.2.2 Wetlands/Waters The SWRCB and RWQCBs regulate the discharge of pollutants to wetlands and other waters through §401 of the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Section 401 requires a state water quality certification of permits issued by federal agencies, such as the Corps. Water quality certifications require the SWRCB or applicable RWQCB to find that the activities permitted by the federal permit will not violate state water quality standards individually or cumulatively over the term of the permit, and that the federal permit will not (the term is typically for five years). The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, Water Code § 13260, requires that any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, that could affect the waters of the State to file a report of discharge with the SWRCB or applicable RWQCB through an application for waste discharge (Water Code Section 13260(a)(1). The term “waters of the State” is defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State (Water Code §13050(e)), and may include “isolated wetlands,” or those wetlands considered to be outside of the Corps’ jurisdiction. Placing fill material into a water of the State generally constitutes “pollution”. Pollution is defined as an alteration of the quality of the waters of the state by waste that unreasonably affects its beneficial uses (Water Code §13050(1)). California Fish and Game Code §§1600-1607 require the CDFW be notified of any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake. Upon notification, the CDFW may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The CDFW defines a stream as follows: 11 “... a body of water that flows at least periodically...through a bed or channel having banks and supporting fish and other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.” (Source: Streambed Alteration Program, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2016). In practice, CDFW authority is extended to any “blue line” stream shown on a USGS topographic map, as well as unmapped channels with a definable bank and bed. Wetlands, as defined by the Corps, need not be present for CDFW to exert authority. 5.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act According to Appendix G of the CEQA (CEQA 2021) Guidelines, a proposed project would have a significant impact on biological resources if it would: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW and USFWS? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on 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? d) Interfere substantially with the movement 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? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 5.2.4 Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance – Chapter 816-6 - Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance 12 According to the Contra Costa County tree ordinance, a “protected tree” is defined as the following: (1) On all properties within the unincorporated area of the county: (A) Where the tree to be cut down, destroyed or trimmed by topping is adjacent to or part of a riparian, foothill woodland or oak savanna area, or part of a stand of four or more trees, measures twenty inches or larger in circumference (approximately 6.5 inches in diameter) as measured four and one-half feet from ground level, and is included in the following list of indigenous trees: Acer macrophyllum (Bigleaf Maple), Acer negundo (Box Elder), Aesculus californica (California Buckeye), Alnus Rhombifolia (White Alder), Arbutus menziesii (Madrone), Heteromeles arbutifolia (Toyon), Juglans Hindsii (California Black Walnut), Juniperus californica (California Juniper), Lithocarpus densiflora (Tanoak or Tanbark Oak), Pinus attenuata (Knobcone Pine), Pinus sabiniana (Digger Pine), Platanus Racemosa (California Sycamore), Populus fremontii (Fremont Cottonwood), Populus trichocarpa (Black Cottonwood), Quercus agrifolia (California or Coast Live Oak), Quercus chrysolepis (Canyon Live Oak), Quercus douglasii (Blue Oak), Quercus kelloggii (California Black Oak), Quercus lobata (Valley Oak), Quercus wislizenii (Interior Live Oak), Salix lasiandra (Yellow Willow), Salix laevigata (Red Willow), Salix lasiolepis (Arroyo Willow), Sambucus callicarpa (Coast Red Elderberry), Sequoia sempervirens (Coast Redwood), Umbellularia californica (California Bay or Laurel); (B) Any tree shown to be preserved on an approved tentative map, development or site plan or required to be retained as a condition of approval; (C) Any tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree. (2) On any of the properties specified in subsection (3) of this section: (A) Any tree measuring twenty inches or larger in circumference (approximately six and one-half inches diameter), measured four and one-half feet from ground level including the oak trees listed above; (B) Any multistemmed tree with the sum of the circumferences measuring forty inches or larger, measured four and one-half feet from ground level; (C) And any significant grouping of trees, including groves of four or more trees. (3) Specified properties referred to in subsection (2) of this section includes: 13 (A) Any developed property within any commercial, professional office or industrial district; (B) Any undeveloped property within any district; (C) Any area designated on the general plan for recreational purposes or open space; (D) Any area designated in the county general plan open space element as visually significant riparian or ridge line vegetation and where the tree is adjacent to or part of a riparian, foothill woodland or oak savanna area. (Ords. 94-59, 94-22). Any person proposing to trench, grade or fill within the dripline of any protected tree or cut down, destroy, trim by topping or remove any protected tree shall apply to the department for a tree permit, not less than ten days prior to the proposed tree removal or tree alterations. Persons who would be eligible to apply for three or more individual tree permits under provisions of this chapter may apply for a collective tree permit for the site. (Ords. 94-59, 94-22). If the reasons for alteration or removal relate to the health of the tree or if grading, trenching or filling is proposed under the dripline of an existing tree, or the review is of a collective tree permit and the director determines that more technical expertise is necessary to make the decision, a report prepared by an arborist may be required, to be paid for by the applicant. (Ords. 94-59, 94-22). 5.2.5 Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance – Chapter 914 – Rights-of-Ways and Setbacks No permanent structures of any kind may be built within the structure setback area. Creek structure setback requirements are outlined in Title 9, Division 914, (Sections 914-14.010, .012, .014) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code and are described as follows: No permanent structures of any kind other than drainage structures may be constructed within or over any easement described in this chapter. Encroachments such as filled slopes, retaining walls, fencing and landscaping shall not be permitted. Public utilities may be installed within easements upon approval by the public works department. (Ords. 89-28, 8540 § 4, 78-5). (a) "Structure setback line" means the line separating the structure setback area from the remainder of the lot. For unimproved earth channels within the subdivision, a structure setback line shall be shown on the final map or parcel map as follows: The thread of the channel shall be shown as accurately as possible, and a dashed line shall indicate the appropriate setback with a note describing the method used to determine the top of bank, selected from those set forth herein. The development rights for that portion of the lot on the creek side of the setback line, which is defined 14 as the "structure setback area," shall be offered for dedication to Contra Costa County by separate instrument. (b) "Top of bank" means the point where the water surface plus sufficient freeboard for the design average recurrence interval runoff intersects the existing ground, or the point where a line with a slope of 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical extending from the toe of the channel intersects the existing ground, whichever point is the greatest vertical distance above the channel invert. A separate top of bank shall be determined for each side of the channel. (c) The structure setback line for unimproved channels shall be determined by measuring the following horizontal distance away from the top of bank on each side of the watercourse: Height of top of bank above channel invert Horizontal distance between top of bank and setback line less than 20' 30' 20' - 29.99' 35' 30' - 39.99' 40' 40' - 49.99' 45' 50' and greater 50' (d) Where significant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required above, the advisory agency may extend the setback line to include such areas. (Chapter 914-14, Ords. 89-28, 85-40 § 6, 78-5, Contra Costa County Code). 6.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES A special-status plant and wildlife species database search and review was conducted using the CNDDB and other sources. An additional search was conducted for special-status plants using CNPS Inventory on-line. Special-status species reports were accessed by searching the CNDDB database for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles which surround the Property, and by examining those species that have been identified in the vicinity of the Property. These quadrangles will be henceforth noted as surrounding quads. The database report identified special- status species known to occur in the region or those that have the potential to occur in the vicinity 15 of the Property. The CNDDB report was used to focus special-status species analysis of the site prior to the reconnaissance surveys. An Olberding Environmental biologist conducted a reconnaissance-level survey of the Property on April 6, 2021. The survey consisted of walking throughout the Property and evaluating the site and adjacent lands for potential biological resources. Existing conditions observed plants and wildlife, adjacent land use, soils and potential biological resources were recorded during the visit. Plant and wildlife species observed within and adjacent to the Property during the reconnaissance survey are listed in Attachment 2, Table 1. Site photographs are provided in Attachment 3 of this document. Attachment 1, Figure 9 shows where each site photo was taken. The objectives of the field survey were to determine the potential presence or absence of special- status species habitat listed in the CNDDB database report and to identify any wetland areas that could be potentially regulated by the Corps, RWQCB, and/or CDFW (CNDDB 2021). In addition, the Olberding Environmental biologist looked for other potential sensitive species or habitats that may not have been obvious from background database reports or research. Surveys conducted after the growing season or conducted outside of the specific flowering period for a special-status plant cannot conclusively determine the presence or absence of such plant species; therefore, site conditions and habitat type were used to determine potential for occurrence. When suitable habitat was observed to support a special-status plant or animal species, it was noted in the discussion for that particular species. Regulatory agencies evaluate the possibility of occurrence based on habitats observed on-site and the degree of connectivity with other special-status animal habitats in the vicinity of the Property. These factors are discussed in each special-status plant or animal section. This report also identifies the potential impacts to species that would be defined as endangered or rare pursuant to Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines. Additionally, this report identifies potential impacts to sensitive biological resources and provides mitigation recommendations to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Potential for occurrence of each special-status or protected plant and animal species was evaluated using the following criteria. • Present: The species has been recorded by CNDDB or other literature as occurring on the Property and/or was observed on the Property during the reconnaissance survey or protocol surveys. • May Occur: The species has been recorded by CNDDB or other literature as occurring within five miles of the Property, and/or was observed within five miles of the Property, and/or suitable habitat for the species is present on the Property or its immediate vicinity. • Not Likely to Occur: The species has historically occurred on or within five miles of the Property but has no current records. The species occurs within five miles of the Property 16 but only marginally suitable habitat conditions are present. The Property is likely to be used only as incidental foraging habitat or as an occasional migratory corridor. • Presumed Absent: The species will not occur on the Property due to the absence of suitable habitat conditions, and/or the lack of current occurrences. Alternatively, if directed or protocol-level surveys were done during the proper occurrence period and the species was not found, it is presumed absent. Sources consulted for agency status information include USFWS (2020) for federally listed species and CDFW (2021) for State of California listed species. Based on information from the above sources, Olberding Environmental developed a target list of special-status plants and animals with the potential to occur within or in the vicinity of the Property (Attachment 2, Table 2). 6.1 Soils Evaluation The soils present on a property may determine if habitat on the site is suitable for certain special- status plants and animals. The host plants of some special-status invertebrates may also require specific soil conditions. In the absence of suitable soil conditions, special-status plants or animals requiring those conditions would be presumed absent. Information regarding soil characteristics for the Property was obtained by viewing the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey report for the Property (NRCS 2019). 6.2 Plant Survey Methods The purposes of the botanical surveys were (1) to characterize the habitat types (plant communities) of the study area; (2) to determine whether any suitable habitat for any special-status plant species occurs within the study area; and (3) to determine whether any sensitive habitat types (wetlands) occur within the study area. Site conditions and plant habitat surveys are important tools in determining the potential occurrence of plants not recorded during surveys (e.g., special- status plants) because presence cannot conclusively be determined if field surveys are conducted after the growing season or conducted outside a specific flowering period. 6.2.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources The biologist conducted focused surveys of literature and special-status species databases in order to identify special-status plant species and sensitive habitat types with potential to occur in the study area. Sources reviewed included the CNDDB occurrence records (CNDDB 2021) and CNPS Inventory (Skinner and Pavlik 1994) for the surrounding quads; and standard flora (The Jepson 17 Manual 2012). From the above sources, a list of special-status plant species with potential to occur in the Property vicinity was developed (Attachment 2, Table 2). 6.2.2 Field Surveys A biologist from Olberding Environmental conducted a reconnaissance-level survey to determine habitat types and the potential for special-status plants based on the observed habitat types. All vascular plant species that were identifiable at the time of the survey were recorded and identified using keys and descriptions in The Jepson Manual (2012). The habitat types occurring on the Property were characterized according to pre-established categories. In classifying the habitat types on the site, the generalized plant community classification schemes of A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens 2009) were consulted. The final classification and characterization of the habitat types of the study area were based on field observations. 6.3 Wildlife Survey Methods The purposes of the wildlife survey were to identify special-status wildlife species and/or potential special-status wildlife habitats within the study area. 6.3.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources A focused review of literature and data sources was conducted in order to determine which special- status wildlife species had potential to occur in the vicinity of the Property. Current agency status information was obtained from USFWS (2020) for species listed as Threatened or Endangered, as well as Proposed and Candidate species for listing, under the federal ESA; and from CDFW (2021b, 2021) for species listed as Threatened or Endangered by the state of California under the CESA or listed as “species of special concern” by CDFW. From the above sources, a list of special- status wildlife species with potential to occur in the Property vicinity was developed (Attachment 2, Table 2). 6.3.2 Field Surveys General Wildlife Survey – An Olberding Environmental biologist conducted a survey of species habitat within the entire study area, including visible portions of the adjacent properties. The purpose of the habitat survey was to evaluate wildlife habitats and the potential for any protected species to occur on or adjacent to the Property. 18 Reconnaissance-Level Raptor Survey – A reconnaissance-level raptor survey was conducted on the Property. Observation points were established on the periphery of the site to view raptor activity over a fifteen- to thirty-minute time period. This survey was conducted with the use of binoculars and notes were taken for each species occurrence. Additionally, utility poles and perch sites in the vicinity of the Property were observed. All raptor activity within and adjacent to the Property was recorded during the reconnaissance-level observation period. Reconnaissance-Level Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) Survey – A reconnaissance-level burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) survey was also conducted on the Property to identify potential burrow sites or burrowing owl use of on-site habitat. The general presence and density of suitable burrow sites (e.g., rodent burrows) was evaluated for the Property. 7.0 RESULTS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The search and review of the CNDDB database reports revealed the occurrence of special-status plant and wildlife species that occur in the habitats found within the Property boundaries (CNDDB 2021). The CNDDB database and background data were reviewed for the surrounding quads. Animal occurrences shown on Attachment 1, Figure 5 and plant occurrences shown on Attachment 1, Figure 6 are located within 5 miles of the Property and were reviewed for their potential to occur on the Property based on general habitat types. Results of the species review is tabulated on Attachment 2, Table 2. Critical habitat within the surrounding quads is shown on Attachment 1, Figure 7. 7.1 Soil Evaluation Results The NRCS (2019) reports two soil types within the Property. A map of this soil type can be found in Attachment 1, Figure 8. The soil type mapped included the following: • TaD: Tierra loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes – Tierra soils are gently sloping to steep and are on dissected terraces and low hills at elevations of 100 to 1,200 feet. The composition of this soil type within the Property consists of 85 percent Tierra and similar soils and 10 percent of minor components including Los Osos (5%) and Millsholm (5%). The Tierra series consists of deep, moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvial materials from sedimentary rocks. Typically, Tierra soils exhibit slow to rapid runoff and very slow permeability. These soils are used mainly for grazing and growing small grains and small areas of large number of crops. Many cultivated areas have reverted to grass. Vegetation dominantly is annual grasses and forbs. This series shows no frequency of ponding or flooding and is nonsaline. Its stratified layers consist of the 19 following (colors are for dry soil unless otherwise stated): Ap--0 to 7 inches; grayish brown loam, very dark grayish brown moist; hard, friable, slightly sticky; strongly acid (pH 5.5). A12--7 to 11 inches; gray loam, very dark gray moist; hard, friable, slightly sticky; medium acid (pH 6.0). B21t--12 to 16 inches; very dark grayish brown clay, very dark brown moist; very hard, very firm, very sticky; slightly acid (pH 6.5). B22t--16 to 25 inches; dark brown clay, dark brown moist; very hard, very firm, very sticky; slightly acid (pH 6.5). B3t--25 to 43 inches; light brownish gray heavy clay loam, grayish brown moist; very hard, firm, sticky; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0). C--43 to 62 inches; pale brown clay loam, dark brown moist; very hard, firm, sticky; mildly alkaline (pH 7.5). • CeA: Conejo Clay Loam, 0-2 percent slopes – The Conejo series consists of very deep, well drained soils with a parent material of alluvium derived from sedimentary rock. These soils are found within valleys at elevation of 10 to 1,000 feet above sea level. The composition of this soil type within the Property consists of 85 percent Conejo and similar soils and 15 percent of minor components including unnamed (5%), Botella (5%), Clear Lake (3%), and Garretson (2%). Ap--0 to 5 inches, (0 to 13 cm); dark gray (10YR 4/1) clay loam, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) moist; 31 percent clay, moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky and strong medium granular structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; many fine and medium irregular pores; slightly alkaline, (pH 7.5) A1--5 to 19 inches, (13 to 48 cm); very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) clay loam, very dark brown (10YR 2/2) moist; 31 percent clay, moderate coarse subangular blocky structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and fine tubular and many fine irregular pores; slightly alkaline (pH 7.5). 20 A2--19 to 30 inches, (48 to 76 cm); very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; 31 percent clay, moderate medium subangular blocky structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and few fine tubular pores; few pressure faces; common fine iron-manganese nodules about l mm diameter; 1 percent gravel; slightly alkaline (pH 7.5). Bw1--30 to 48 inches, (76 to 122 cm); dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; 29 percent clay; moderate coarse subangular blocky structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and fine tubular and many fine irregular pores; many pressure faces; few fine iron-manganese nodules about 1 mm diameter; 2 percent gravel; slightly alkaline (pH 7.5). Bw2--48 to 70 inches, (122 to 178 cm); brown (10YR 5/3) loam, dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) moist; 19 percent clay, weak fine and medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, weakly brittle but friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and few fine and medium tubular pores; slightly effervescent in seams; common medium oxidized iron masses; 1 percent gravel; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0). 7.2 Plant Survey Results 7.2.1 Floristic Inventory and Habitat Characterization The Property supports four habitat types consisting of developed, mixed woodland, perennial creek, and riparian woodland. In classifying the habitat types on the Property, generalized plant community classification schemes were used (Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens 2009). The final classification and characterization of the habitat type of the Property was based on field observations. Plant species that occurred within 5 miles of the Property are shown in Attachment 1, Figure 6. The habitat type and a description of the plant species present within the habitat type are provided below. The habitats found on the Property are mapped on Attachment 1, Figure 10. Dominant plant species are also noted. A complete list of plant species observed on the Property can be found within Attachment 2, Table 1. 21 Mixed Woodland A substantial portion of the 3.05-acre Property, 1.35 acres, is dominated by mixed woodland habitat. Mixed woodland habitat exists in the northern, eastern and western portions of the Property. Dominant vegetation observed within this habitat type includes but is not limited to wild oat, Italian ryegrass, ripgut brome, common vetch (Vicia sativa), cleavers (Galium aparine), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) and Bermuda buttercup (Oxalis pes-caprae). Valley and coast live oaks are present in the central portion of the western mixed woodland habitat. Black walnut and elm trees are located centrally in the eastern portion of the woodland habitat. Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) are also present throughout the mixed woodland habitat. Developed The Property contains two existing residential homes that, combined, encompass approximately 0.22 acres. A two-story home is located on the northwestern boundary along Grayson Road while the other home (one-story) is located centrally near the southern boundary of the Property. The northern residential home is immediately surrounded by mixed woodland habitat to the north in which a large cedar tree is present, coast live oak trees and additional structures including a shed and chicken coop to the south, and black walnut and elm trees to the east. A graded driveway starting at Grayson Road, runs south along the western side of the northern residential home to the southern residential home. The southern home is immediately surrounded by mixed woodland habitat to the north, south and west and woodland riparian habitat to the east. A large coast live oak tree exists at the northeast corner of the residential structure. Perennial Creek Running southwest to northeast along the southern boundary of the property is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek originating in Briones Regional Park. Grayson Creek encompasses approximately 0.06 acres (755 linear feet) of the Property. Approximately 4.6 miles northeast of the Property, Grayson Creek drains into Pacheco Slough, which in turn drains into Suisun Bay, approximately 3.75 miles further north. Dominant vegetation along the banks of Grayson Creek include but are not limited to English ivy (Hedera helix), cleavers and Bermuda buttercup. An oak woodland corridor exists adjacent to Grayson Creek within the Property. 22 Riparian Woodland A riparian woodland corridor of approximately 1.50 acres occurs along Grayson Creek in the southern portion of the Property. Native species found in the riparian habitat include coast live oak, willow (Salix spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica) and California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica). Non-native species present in the riparian woodland include blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) and tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima). Dominant understory plants include English ivy, Bermuda buttercup, periwinkle (Vinca major) and poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum). Special-Status Plant Species Special-status plant species include species listed as Rare, Threatened, or Endangered by the USFWS (2020) or by the State of California (CDFW 2021b). Federal Proposed and Candidate species (USFWS, 2019) are also special-status species. Special-status species also include species listed on List 1A, List 1B, or List 2 of the CNPS Inventory (Skinner and Pavlik, 1994; CNPS 2021). All species in the above categories fall under state regulatory authority under the provisions of CEQA and may also fall under federal regulatory authority. Considered special-status species are species included on List 3 (Plants About Which We Need More Information—A Review List) or List 4 (Plants of Limited Distribution—A Watch List) of the CNPS Inventory. These species are considered to be of lower sensitivity and generally do not fall under specific state or federal regulatory authority. Specific mitigation considerations are not generally required for List 3 and List 4 species. Attachment 2, Table 2 includes a list of special-status plants with the potential to occur within or in the immediate vicinity of the Property based on a review of the surrounding quads. The special- status plant species identified by the CNDDB as potentially occurring on the Property are known to grow only from specific habitat types. The specific habitats or “micro-climate” necessary for many of the plant species to occur are not found within the boundaries of the Property. The habitats necessary for the CNDDB reported plant species consist of valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodlands, chaparral, playas, chenopod scrub, adobe clay soils, alkaline soils, serpentine soils, sandy soils, gravelly soils, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, coastal dunes, coastal bluff scrub, coastal salt marsh, vernal pools, seeps, meadows and sinks, marshes or swamps, riparian woodlands, on slopes near drainages, closed cone coniferous forest, north coast coniferous forest, redwood forest, lower montane coniferous forest, and broad-leafed upland forest. Occurrences of special-status plants within a five-mile radius of the point roughly representing the center of the Property are described in detail. Occurrence distance from the Property is estimated from this center point (Attachment 1, Figure 6). 23 Congdon’s Tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii). CNPS List 1B. Congdon’s tarplant is a member of the genus Hemizonia in the sunflower family (Asteraceae). It is one of four subspecies of Parry’s tarplant (Hemizonia parryi). Congdon’s tarplant is a prostrate to erect, annual herb with rigidly spine-tipped leaves and yellow ray- and disk-flowers (head). It occurs in valley and foothill grasslands in moist alkaline soils and blooms between June and November. Historically, Congdon’s tarplant was distributed from Solano County south to San Luis Obispo County. Four CNDDB occurrences of this species have occurred within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #2) was located approximately 1.2 miles southeast of the Property. A survey completed in 1998 observed that the population previously seen in this location is considered extirpated. Suitable habitat for Congdon’s tarplant exists within the mixed woodland habitat of the Property; however, no plants were present at the time of the survey. The survey performed for this report consisted of a reconnaissance survey performed outside of the identified blooming period of this species (June-November), however remnant plants would have been observed if they were present. For these reasons Congdon’s tarplant is presumed absent from the property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to Congdon’s Tarplant. Diablo Helianthella (Helianthella castanea). CNPS List 1B. Diablo helianthella is a perennial that exhibits yellow sunflowers that bloom between April and June. The plant has simple broad leaves that are attached at the base of the stem and grows up to two feet in height. The Diablo helianthella is known to grow on open grassy sites in cismontane woodland and closed-cone coniferous forests. Eleven CNDDB occurrences of this species have occurred within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #46) was located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the Property in Briones Regional Park. This occurrence involved the observation of 25 plants in 2004. Potentially suitable habitat exists in the understory of the riparian woodland habitat and the mixed woodland habitat. However, the April 2021 survey occurred during the blooming period for Diablo Helianthella and this species was not observed. Therefore, this species has a low potential to occur on site and is presumed absent from the Property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to Diablo helianthella. Mount Diablo Fairy-Lantern (Calochortus pulchellus). CNPS List 1B. Mount Diablo fairy-lantern is a spring blooming bulb that is in flower between April and June. This species exhibits light yellow globe-shaped flowers that turn down as if nodding. The plant grows to approximately one and a half feet tall and has between one to several flowers on the stem 24 and long, narrow, pointed leaves. This bulb specifically grows on wooded slopes in chaparral and in valley and foothill grassland habitat. CNDDB listed six occurrences of this species within five miles of the Property. The closest and most recent occurrence (Occurrence #23) was located approximately 1.5 miles west of the Property in Briones Regional Park. This occurrence involved the observation of 52 plants along Spengler Trail in 2006. The wooded slopes of the oak woodland habitat and the mixed woodland areas of the Property offer potentially suitable habitat for the Mount Diablo fairy-lantern. However, the April 2021 survey coincided with the blooming period for Mount Diablo fairy-lantern and this species was not observed. Therefore, Mount Diablo fairy-lantern has a low potential to occur on site and is presumed absent from the Property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to Mount Diablo fairy-lantern. Bent-Flowered Fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris). CNPS List 1B. Bent-flowered fiddleneck is an annual of the family Boraginaceae. The inflorescence is a scorpiod-cyme and coiled at the tip with multiple small orange flowers. It is distributed throughout the inner north coast ranges of California, in the west Central Valley, and the San Francisco Bay Area. Habitat consists of coastal bluff scrub, cismontane woodlands, and valley and foothill grasslands. The blooming period is between March and June. CNDDB listed four occurrences (Occurrence #75, #41, #30, #43) of this species within five miles of the Property. All occurrences were located within Briones Hills in Briones Regional Park. Although potentially suitable habitat occurs within the mixed woodland habitat, the April 2021 survey of the Property occurred during the blooming period for bent-flowered fiddleneck and this species was not observed. Therefore, bent-flowered fiddleneck has a low potential to occur on site, and is presumed absent from the Property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to bent- flowered fiddleneck. 7.3 Wildlife Survey Results 7.3.1 General Wildlife Species and Habitats A complete list of wildlife species observed within the Property can be found in Attachment 2, Table 1. Wildlife species commonly occurring within habitat types present on the Property are discussed below: 25 Mixed Woodland The mixed woodland habitat provides many foraging opportunities for a wide range of species. Passerine species observed during the survey include dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis), California towhee (Melozone crissalis), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), spotted towhee (Pipilo maculatus), and white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys). Other avian species observed include American crow (Corvus bracyrynchos), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna) and turkey vulture (Cathartes aura). Raptor species observed foraging during the survey included red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, and Cooper’s hawk. However, the mixed woodland habit could potentially be utilized for foraging by other species including sharp-shinned hawk and American kestrel. Scattered burrow colonies created by small mammals including but not limited to Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) and various vole species (Microtus spp.) were observed along the southern edge of the mixed woodland habitat adjacent to the riparian woodland. The cover from the grasses throughout the mixed woodland habitat and the small mammal burrows present offer suitable habitat for various reptile species. Numerous western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis) were observed throughout the Property. Other reptile species including Pacific gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer catenifer) and California king snake (Lampropeltis californiae) may also occur. Developed The existing structures and adjacent mature oak, cedar and ornamental trees provide suitable habitat for numerous bird species and potentially some bats. Avian species observed in the developed area include acorn woodpecker, western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), Steller’s jay (Cyanocitta stelleri), hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus) and dark-eyed junco. Bat species that could utilize this habitat for roosting include hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis), and Western red bat. Perennial Creek Grayson Creek offers suitable foraging opportunities for various insectivorous avian species such as black phoebe and mammalian species such as hoary bat and Yuma myotis. 26 The creek could offer suitable foraging and dispersal habitat for western pond turtle and many amphibian species including, California red-legged frog, Sierran tree frog (Pseudacris sierra), and western toad (Anaxyrus boreas). Riparian Woodland The riparian woodland corridor running adjacent to Grayson Creek has the most chance to provide nesting habitat for passerine and raptor avian species as well as provide roosting habitat for bats including potentially sensitive species like the Western red bat. Numerous avian species were observed in the woodland habitat including spotted towhee, dark- eyed junco, and Steller’s jay. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed displaying territorial behavior towards a red-tailed hawk which may be indicative of defensive behavior of a nesting site. Pacific tree frog and other amphibian species may also use the area for foraging and breeding. BIRDS Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus). MBTA. The red-shouldered hawk is a medium-sized, slender Buteo with long legs and a long tail and is smaller than the red-tailed hawk. Upperparts are dark with pale spotting, and rusty-reddish feathers on the wing create the distinctive shoulder patch. The tail has several wide, dark bars; the intervening narrow stripes and the tip of the tail are white, and there is variation in the number of tail bars among adults and juveniles. The habitat that the red-shouldered hawk prefers varies from bottomland hardwoods and riparian areas to upland deciduous or mixed deciduous-conifer forest, and almost always includes some form of water, such as a swamp, marsh, river, or pond. In the west, the red-shouldered hawk sometimes occurs in coniferous forests, and has been expanding its range of occupied habitats to include various woodlands, including stands of eucalyptus trees amid urban sprawl. They typically place their nests in a broad-leaved tree (occasionally in a conifer), below the forest canopy but toward the tree top, usually in the crotch of the main trunk. Nest trees are often near a pond, stream, or swamp, and can be in suburban neighborhoods or parks. These hawks eat mostly small mammals, lizards, snakes, and amphibians. They also eat toads, snakes, and crayfish. They occasionally eat birds, sometimes from bird feeders; recorded prey includes sparrows, starlings, and doves. The CNDDB does not track occurrences of red-shouldered hawk. However, two red-shouldered hawks were observed foraging and pair bonding on the Property during the survey. The large trees present within the mixed woodland area, and those found along the riparian corridor offer suitable 27 nesting habitat. In addition, foraging opportunities occur throughout the Property in the mixed woodland habitat. Given the information above the red-shouldered hawk has high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting capacity and was present in a foraging capacity. Red-Tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). MBTA. The red-tailed hawk is a large Buteo that is distinct due to the red color of its tail feathers in contrast to the brown color of its body. Not all red-tailed hawks exhibit the distinct coloration on their tail and gradations may occur especially in young birds. Red-tailed hawks hunt rodents by soaring over grassland habitat. Nest trees for red-tailed hawks are usually tall trees with a well-developed canopy that includes a strong branching structure on which to build a nest. The CNDDB does not track occurrences of red-tailed hawk. However, red-tailed hawks were observed foraging on the Property during the April 2021 survey. The large trees present within and around the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. In addition, foraging opportunities occur throughout the Property. Given the information above the red-tailed hawk has high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting capacity and was present in a foraging capacity. Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii). MBTA. Coopers’ hawk is a medium to large-size raptor, reaching an average of 28-34 in wingspan. They are distinctive for the black and white horizontal banding on the elongated tail, blue gray head, back and upper wings. Additional markings include rusty red horizontal barring on a white breast, a large square head, and long yellow legs and feet. The diet of Cooper’s hawk consists mainly of small to medium-sized birds which they ambush by surprise, but they will also consume squirrels and other small mammals. CNDDB did not list any occurrences of Cooper’s hawk. The large trees present within the riparian habitat on the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. A Cooper’s hawk was observed foraging on the Property and displaying territorial behavior towards a red-tailed hawk during the April 2021 survey. This display may indicate defensive behavior of a nesting site. Given the information above, the Cooper’s hawk has high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting capacity and was present in a foraging capacity. Sharp-Shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus). MBTA. The sharp-shinned hawk is a small raptor with short, rounded wings, and has an average wingspan of 17” to 23”. This hawk has a long tail that is squared-off at tip with prominent corners. This raptor typically flies with several quick, snappy wing beats and a short glide, but also soars. Its small, rounded head does not project far beyond the wings when soaring. The adult sharp-shinned 28 hawk exhibits a red eye, black cap, and a blue-gray back and upper wings. The white breast, belly and under wing coverts are marked by fine, thin, reddish bars. Sharp-shinned hawks specialize in hunting avian prey with songbirds making up 90 percent of its diet. These hawks will occasionally eat small rodents, such as mice and voles, and even some insects. Throughout their range, sharp-shinned hawks favor conifer trees (pine, spruce, or fir) as nesting sites, but may also use aspens and hardwood trees. The nest is always placed under dense forest cover, usually toward the top of a tall tree, but well under the canopy. Most nests are anchored between horizontal limbs and the tree trunk. CNDDB did not list any occurrences of sharp-shinned hawk. However, the large trees present within the riparian habitat on the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. Additionally, foraging opportunities are present in the woodland habitats with the number of passerine bird species observed during the April 2021 survey. Given the information above, sharp-shinned hawk has a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a nesting and foraging capacity and may occur. American Kestrel (Falco sparverius). MBTA. The American kestrel is the smallest of raptor species and is distinct due to the black barring on its face. The female kestrel is slightly larger than the male bird and is differentiated by its brown and red coloration. The male kestrel is slightly smaller than the female and has gray wing patches near the top of the wing. Kestrels favor open areas with short ground vegetation and sparse trees. They are generally found in meadows, grasslands, deserts, parks, farm fields, cities, and suburbs, and are attracted to many habitats modified by humans. Kestrels utilize cavities in trees and structures for nesting. They’re diet consists mostly of insects and other invertebrates, but they also hunt small rodents, birds, and reptiles. CNDDB did not list any occurrences of American kestrel. However, cavities within the large trees present on the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. Additionally, foraging opportunities are present in the woodland habitats with the number of insects, lizards, and passerine bird species observed during the April 2021 survey. Given the information above, American kestrel has a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a nesting and foraging capacity and may occur. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia). Federal Species of Special Concern, California Species of Special Concern. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified the burrowing owl is as a “candidate” species. Candidate species are animals and plants that may warrant official listing as threatened or 29 endangered, but there is no conclusive data to give them this protection at the present time. As a candidate species, burrowing owls receive no legal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, this species does receive some legal protection from the U.S. through the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which forbids the destruction of the birds and active nests. In California, the burrowing owl considered a “species of special concern.” Burrowing owls are ground dwelling members of the owl family and are small brown to tan colored birds with bold spots and barring. Burrowing owls generally require open annual grassland habitats in which to nest, but can be found on abandoned lots, roads, airports, and other urban areas. Burrowing owls generally use abandoned California ground squirrel holes for their nesting burrow but are also known to use pipes or other debris for nesting purposes. Burrowing owls prefer annual grassland habitats with low vegetative cover. The breeding season for burrowing owls occurs from March through August. Burrowing owls often nest in loose colonies about 100 yards apart. They lay three to twelve eggs from mid-May to early June. The female incubates the clutch for about 28 days, while the male provides her with food. The young owls begin appearing at the burrow’s entrance two weeks after hatching and leave the nest to hunt for insects on their own after about 45 days. The chicks can fly well at six weeks old. CNDDB listed two occurrences of burrowing owl within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #1164) was observed approximately 3.0 miles northeast of the Property in Buchanan Field Airport in the City of Concord. During this observation, two unpaired adults were observed along the runway in January 2008. The Property does not have suitable grassland habitat for burrowing owl. Additionally, no ground squirrel burrows were observed on site. A few mammal burrows were present on site however these burrows were most likely constructed by smaller mammals such as pocket gophers and voles, which are inadequate for burrowing owls. Additionally, high vegetative cover is present in the woodland habitat which is a characteristic that burrowing owl do not generally prefer. For these reasons the burrowing owl has a low potential to occur on the Property in nesting and foraging capacity and is not likely to occur. MAMMALS Special-status Bats Bats (Order - Chiroptera) are the only mammals capable of “true” flight. They are nocturnal feeders and locate their prey, which consists of small to medium sized insects by echolocation. Bats consume vast amounts of insects making them very effective pest control agents. They may eat as much as their weight in insects per day. Maternity roosts comprised of only females, may be found in buildings or mine shafts with temperatures up to 40 degrees Celsius and a high percentage of humidity to ensure rapid growth in the young. Female bats give birth to only one or 30 two young annually and roost in small or large numbers. Males may live singly or in small groups, but scientists are still unsure of the whereabouts of most males in summer. Special-status bats with the potential to occur on the Property are listed below: • Western Red Bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) • Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus) • Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) CNDDB listed the hoary bat (Occurrence #20) as occurring within the 5-mile radius of the Property. This occurrence was recorded approximately 2.0 miles east of the Property. The large oak and redwood trees and the existing residential homes could potentially offer roosting sites for multiple bat species. The woodland habitat and Grayson Creek provide an array of insects, allowing for abundant foraging opportunities. Given the above information, multiple species of bats have a moderate potential to occur on the Property in roosting and foraging capacity. AMPHIBIANS California Red-Legged Frog (Rana draytonii). Federally Threatened, California Species of Special Concern. California red-legged frog (CRLF) was listed as a Federal threatened species on May 31, 1996 (61 FR 25813) and is considered threatened throughout its range. If a proposed federal action may affect, and is likely to adversely affect, a listed species, Section 7 of the ESA requires consideration of those species through formal consultations with the USFWS. On April 13, 2006, USFWS designated critical habitat for the CRLF under the ESA. In total, approximately 450,288 acres fell within the boundaries of critical habitat designation. A new ruling by the USFWS on March 17, 2010, revised the designation of critical habitat for CRLF (75 FR 12815 12959). In total, approximately 1,636,609 acres of critical habitat in 27 California counties fall within the boundaries of the final revised critical habitat designation. This rule became effective on April 16, 2010. The CRLF is a rather large frog, measuring one and a half to five inches in length. They are reddish- brown to gray in color, with many poorly defined dark specks and blotches. Dorsolateral folds are present. The underside of the CRLF is washed with red on the lower abdomen and hind legs. The CRLF has a dark mask bordered by a light stripe on the jaw, smooth eardrums, and not fully webbed toes. The male has enlarged forearms and swollen thumbs. Its vocals consist of a series of 31 weak throaty notes, rather harsh, and lasting two to three seconds. Breeding occurs from December to March with egg masses laid in permanent bodies of water. The CRLF is found in lowlands, foothill woodland and grasslands, near marshes, lakes, ponds or other water sources. These amphibians require dense shrubby or emergent vegetation closely associated with deep still or slow-moving water. Generally, these frogs favor intermittent streams with water at least two and a half feet deep and where the shoreline has relatively intact emergent or shoreline vegetation. CRLF is known from streams with relatively low gradients and those waters where introduced fish and bullfrogs are absent. CRLF are known to take refuge upland in small mammal burrows during periods of high-water flow. CRLF occurs west of the Sierra Nevada-Cascade and in the Coast Ranges along the entire length of the state. Historically, they occurred throughout the Central Valley and Sierra Nevada foothills south to northern Baja California. Now they are found from Sonoma and Butte Counties south to Riverside County, but mainly in Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of CRLF occurring within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (#158) observed in 2004 was located approximately 2 miles west of the Property. During this occurrence, 3 adult CRLF were observed in two permanent freshwater ponds located within Briones Regional Park. The Property is located approximately 1.3 miles east from USFWS- designated critical habitat for CRLF (Unit ALA-1B)(Attachment 1, Figure 7). Although deep plunge pools are not present within the portion of Grayson Creek that borders the Property, water was present in the entire length of the creek bordering the Property during the April 2021 survey. Vegetative debris throughout the riparian woodland corridor offers suitable upland refugial habitat for CRLF. Therefore, Grayson Creek could offer potential aquatic dispersal and foraging opportunities for CRLF, and the surrounding riparian habitat could offer terrestrial dispersal habitat. For these reasons CRLF has a moderate potential to occur on site in the creek channel and riparian wood habitats in a dispersal capacity only (see Table 2). California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Federally Threatened, State Threatened. Adult California tiger salamanders (CTS) inhabit rolling grassland and oak savannah. Adults spend most of the year in subterranean retreats such as rodent burrows but may be found on the surface during dispersal to and from breeding sites. The preferred breeding sites are vernal pools and other temporary ponds. However, CTS may use permanent manmade ponds as breeding habitat. CTS adults begin migrating to ponds after the first heavy rains of fall and can be found in or around the breeding ponds during and after winter rainstorm events. In extremely dry years, CTS may not reproduce. 32 After mating, females lay several small clusters of eggs, which contain from one to over 100 eggs. The eggs are deposited on both emergent and submerged vegetation, as well as submerged detritus. A minimum of ten weeks is required to complete larval development through metamorphosis, at which time the larvae will normally weigh about ten grams. Larvae remaining in pools for a longer time period can grow to much larger sizes. Upon metamorphosis, juvenile CTS migrate in large masses at night from the drying breeding sites to refuge sites. Prior to this migration, the juveniles spend anywhere from a few hours to a few days near the pond margin. Adult CTS are largely opportunistic feeders, preying upon arthropod and annelid species that occur in burrow systems, as well as aquatic invertebrates found within seasonal pools. The larvae feed on aquatic invertebrates and insects, showing a distinct preference for larvae of the Pacific tree frog. On August 4, 2004, the USFWS announced the listing of the CTS as threatened throughout its range with the exception of the Sonoma and Santa Barbara County populations which are listed as endangered (USFWS 2004). On March 3, 2010, the California Fish and Game Commission designated CTS as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. On August 23, 2005, the Service designated 199,109 acres of critical habitat in 19 counties for the central California population of the CTS. On August 2, 2005, they proposed 74,223 acres of critical habitat for CTS in Sonoma County, California. This habitat is located in the Santa Rosa Plain in central Sonoma and includes lands bordered on the west by Laguna de Santa Rosa, to the south by Skillman Road, northwest of Petaluma, to the east by foothills, and to the north by Windsor Creek. On December 14, 2005, in a final decision, USFWS designated and excluded 17,418 acres of critical habitat for CTS, so that no critical habitat is being designated for the Sonoma County population. CNDDB has listed four occurrences (Occurrence #413, #43, #582, #418) of CTS occurring within five miles of the Property. All four of these occurrences are considered to be historical with the most recent occurrence (Occurrence #418) observed in 1954 and the sites are considered to be extirpated. The Property lacks vernal pools or other ponds suitable for breeding habitat. For these reasons there is a low potential for CTS to occur on the Property and CTS is presumed absent. REPTILES Alameda Whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus). Federally Threatened, State Threatened. The Alameda whipsnake is one of two subspecies of the California whipsnake. It is distinguished from the chaparral whipsnake (M. l. lateralis) by the broad orange striping on its sides. Adults reach approximately three to five feet in length and show a sooty black to dark brown back, cream colored undersides and pinkish tail. This species is typically found in chaparral, northern coastal sage scrub, and coastal sage habitats; however, annual grasslands, oak woodlands, and oak 33 savannah serve as habitat during the breeding season. Egg-laying occurs near scrub habitat on ungrazed grasslands with scattered shrub cover. The known distribution for Alameda whipsnake includes Sobrante Ridge, Oakland Hills, Mount Diablo, the Black Hills, and Wauhab Ridge. Male and female snakes are active from April to November finding mates. During the breeding season from late March through mid-June, male snakes exhibit more movement throughout their home range, while female snakes remain sedentary from March until egg laying. Females lay a clutch of 6 to 11 eggs, usually in loose soil or under logs or rocks. CNDDB listed 13 occurrences of the Alameda whipsnake within the vicinity of the Property. The exact locations of these collections were not recorded in the CNDDB due to the sensitivity of this species. Refer to Attachment 1 Figure 5 to see approximate range of listed occurrences. The Property is located approximately 0.9 miles from USFWS designated critical habitat in Briones Regional Park (unit: 3) (See Attachment 1 Figure 7). The most recent occurrence (# 180) occurred approximately 3.5 miles in 2018. During this occurrence, two Alameda whipsnake were detected in April 2018 on Mount Wanda in Martinez. The closest occurrence (# 62) involved the observation of 1 adult whipsnake in coyote brush scrub in August 2002. This occurrence was located approximately 1.2 miles southwest just outside Briones Regional Park. The Property does not support scrub or rocky outcrop habitat which the Alameda whipsnake prefers. Residential development surrounds the Property which may discourage Alameda whipsnake from using the Property. However, open space parks are also present within the vicinity of the Property; thus, whipsnake could disperse through the Property as it moves to more suitable habitat. For these reasons, Alameda whipsnake has a low potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity only. Western Pond Turtle (Emys marmorata). California Species of Special Concern. The western pond turtle is a thoroughly aquatic turtle that may be found in marshes, ponds, streams and irrigation ditches where aquatic vegetation is present. The turtles, which range from nine to ten inches in size, require basking sites and suitable upland habitat for egg laying. Suitable breeding upland habitats may consist of sandy banks or grassy open fields. The western pond turtle has a dark brown to olive-colored carapace with hexagonal scales that lack prominent markings. Nesting and incubation occur from April to September, with a peak time for mating and egg laying occurring from March to May. After a 73 to 80-day gestation or incubation period, 5 to 13 eggs will be laid from July to October. Eggs are produced either once or twice a year. Females may travel some distance from water for egg-laying, moving as much as 0.8 kilometers (a half mile) away from and up to 90 meters (300 feet) above the nearest source of water. Most nests are within 34 90 meters (300 feet) of water. The female usually leaves the water in the evening and may wander far before selecting a nest site, often in an open area of sand or hardpan that is facing southwards. The nest is flask-shaped with an opening of about five centimeters (two inches). Females spend considerable time covering up the nest with soil and adjacent low vegetation, making it difficult for a person to find unless it has been disturbed by a predator. Activity slows from November to February. During the winter when water and air temperatures cool, usually from September to March, the turtles begin to hibernate. During hibernation, turtles either bury themselves in the mud at the bottom of ponds or will bury themselves on land in duff (top layer of decomposing vegetation and soil). Some turtles travel more than a half mile to over- winter on land, though many select the nearest wooded or shrubby area they can bury in. Turtles then emerge from hibernation in the spring to start the yearly cycle again. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of the western pond turtle within the vicinity of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #1360) was located approximately 4 miles northeast of the Property. During this occurrence one adult was observed during a survey of the Clayton Valley drain prior to routine maintenance. The portion of Grayson Creek bordering the Property lacks basking pools and is mostly shaded, however water was present in the creek during the April 2021 survey. Therefore, western pond turtle could potentially use the creek channel and the surrounding riparian woodland corridor as dispersal habitat. Given the information above, western pond turtle has a moderate potential to occur on the Property and may occur in a dispersal capacity only. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPACT ANALYSIS 7.1 Waters Results of the biological resource analysis survey conducted by Olberding Environmental indicate that the Property contains waters that may be considered jurisdictional by the Army Corps of Engineers, RWQCB or CDFW. Grayson Creek runs along the southern boundary of the Property. Although the proposed project does not include conducting any activities within Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor, the waters mitigation presented in Section 8.0 would reduce any potential impacts to less-than-significant levels. 7.2 Riparian Habitat The proposed project plans on the removal of approximately 84 trees including native species such as coast live oak, valley oak, black walnut, and buckeye. Native trees that are part of or adjacent to a riparian area, and measure greater than 6.5 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) are 35 considered protected under the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 816-6, Ordinances 94-59, 94-22, Contra Costa County Code). Adherence to County ordinances that pertain to riparian habitat protection including the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance described above and the Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance (Chapter 914) (Attachment 1, Figure 11), and implementation of the mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 would reduce any potential impacts to less-than-significant levels. 7.3 Special-status Plants No special-status plant species were determined to have a potential to occur on the Property. The April 2021 survey coincided with the blooming period of three special-status plants (Diablo helianthella, Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern, bent-flowered fiddleneck) that may have had the potential to occur on the Property and these plants were not observed. Although the survey occurred outside the blooming period for Congdon’s tarplant, remnant plants were not observed. The proposed project will not have an impact to special status plants and no further measures related to protection of special-status plants are recommended. 7.4 Special-status Wildlife Foraging or Nesting Raptor/Passerine Species – A total of five raptor species were identified as having potential to occur on the Property. Three species including red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, and Cooper’s hawk had a high potential to occur in a foraging and nesting capacity and were present in a foraging capacity. The sharp-shinned hawk and American kestrel had a moderate potential to occur in a foraging and nesting capacity. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to nesting avian species protected under the MBTA to less-than-significant levels. Special-Status Mammals – Given the presence of suitable onsite habitat; the Western red bat, hoary bat and Yuma myotis have a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a foraging and roosting capacity. No immediate signs were present during the initial survey; however, large trees throughout the riparian and mixed woodland habitats, and the existing residential structures could provide roosting sites. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to bat species to less-than-significant levels. Special-Status Amphibians – One amphibian species, CRLF, has been identified as having a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity. Multiple CNDDB occurrences and USFWS designated critical habitat of CRLF are recorded in the vicinity of the Property. The Property contains suitable aquatic dispersal habitat and foraging opportunities in Grayson Creek 36 and suitable upland habitat in the riparian corridor. For these reasons CRLF has a moderate potential to occur in a foraging and dispersal capacity throughout the creek channel and associated riparian woodland corridor. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to CRLF to less-than- significant levels. Special-Status Reptiles – The Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle were identified by the CNDDB as occurring in the vicinity of the Property. An assessment of the Property concluded that the Property does not support the shrub and rock outcrop habitat that Alameda whipsnake prefers. More suitable habitat is located west and north of the Property in Briones Regional Park and the surrounding open space. Thus, Alameda whipsnake is not likely to occur on the Property in a breeding capacity or as a permanent resident. The Property is essentially surrounded by residential development; however, areas of open space do occur within the vicinity of the Property. Whipsnake could disperse through the riparian and mixed woodland habitat present within the Property as it migrates through to more suitable habitat. Therefore, Alameda whipsnake has a low potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity only. Western pond turtle could utilize Grayson Creek for aquatic dispersal and the surrounding riparian woodland corridor as terrestrial dispersal. Therefore, western pond turtle has a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity only. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to western pond turtle or Alameda whipsnake to less-than-significant levels. 8.0 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential Project impacts, listed in Section 4.3.2 (California Environmental Quality Act) of this report, to less than significant levels for the biological resources discussed below. Corps and State Regulated Waters - With implementation of the mitigation measure (MM #1) provided below, the Project would have a less than significant adverse effect on federally protected waters 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. MM #1) Corps and State Regulated Waters – Jurisdictional waters potentially regulated under the authority of the Corps, RWQCB, and CDFW are present on the Property. The proposed project shall implement all County ordinances that require a setback from Grayson Creek to prevent the fill of waters or impacts to Grayson Creek or the bed or bank of the creek. 37 Riparian Habitat - If removal of any trees deemed “protected” by the Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance (Chapter 816-6) from the riparian habitat during project activities is to occur, the above tree ordinance and the Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance (Chapter 914) must be adhered to. With implementation of the mitigation measure (MM #2) provided below, the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by CDFW or USFWS. MM #2) Trees – For all riparian associated trees that are removed from the Property, a 3:1 replacement ratio for all native trees and a 1:1 replacement ratio for all non-native trees (with native species) is recommended by Olberding Environmental. Special-Status Wildlife Species - With implementation of the mitigation measures (MM #3; MM #4; MM #5; MM #6; MM #7; and MM #8) provided below, the Project is not expected to have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW and USFWS. Wildlife corridors and native nurseries - With implementation of the mitigation measures (MM #3; MM #4; MM #5; MM #6; and MM #7) provided below, the Project would not interfere substantially with the movement 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. MM #3) Pre-Construction Avian Survey – If project construction-related activities would take place during the nesting season (February through August), preconstruction surveys for nesting passerine birds and raptors (birds of prey) within the Property and the large trees within the adjacent riparian area should be conducted by a qualified biologist 14 days prior to the commencement of the tree removal or site grading activities. If any bird listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is found to be nesting within the project site or within the area of influence, an adequate protective buffer zone should be established by a qualified biologist to protect the nesting site. This buffer shall be a minimum of 75 feet from the project activities for passerine birds, and a minimum of 200 feet for raptors. The distance shall be determined by a qualified biologist based on the site conditions (topography, if the nest is in a line of sight of the construction and the sensitivity of the birds nesting). The nest site(s) shall be monitored by a biologist periodically to see if the birds are stressed by the construction activities and if the protective buffer needs to be increased. Once the young have fledged and are flying well enough to avoid project 38 construction zones (typically by August), the project can proceed without further regard to the nest site(s). MM #4) Pre-construction Bat Survey – To avoid “take” of special–status bats, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented prior to the removal of any existing trees or structures on the project site: a) A bat habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist during seasonal periods of bat activity (mid–February through mid–October – ca. Feb. 15 – Apr. 15, and Aug. 15 – October 30), to determine suitability of each existing structure as bat roost habitat. b) Structures found to have no suitable openings can be considered clear for project activities as long as they are maintained so that new openings do not occur. c) Structures found to provide suitable roosting habitat, but without evidence of use by bats, may be sealed until project activities occur, as recommended by the bat biologist. Structures with openings and exhibiting evidence of use by bats shall be scheduled for humane bat exclusion and eviction, conducted during appropriate seasons, and under supervision of a qualified bat biologist. d) Bat exclusion and eviction shall only occur between February 15 and April 15, and from August 15 through October 30, in order to avoid take of non–volant (non– flying or inactive, either young, or seasonally torpid) individuals. OR A qualified wildlife biologist experienced in surveying for and identifying bat species should survey the portion of the Property with large trees and abandoned structures. If tree removal is proposed to determine if any special–status bats reside in the trees. Any special–status bats identified should be removed without harm. Bat houses sufficient to shelter the number of bats removed should be erected in open space areas that would not be disturbed by project development. MM #5) Pre-construction Reptile Survey – While potential occurrence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle is limited to dispersal throughout the creek channel, riparian woodland corridor, and mixed woodland habitats, a pre-construction survey for special status reptile species should be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of these species. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be 39 conducted by the Designated Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. MM #6) Pre-construction Amphibian Surveys – Directed pre-construction surveys for CRLF are recommended prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A Designated Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. Wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) should be installed along the grading limit of the Project site in order to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground at a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A Designated Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be onsite during initial ground-disturbing activities in order to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the Designated Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a Qualified Biologist. MM #7) Wildlife Exclusion Fencing – In order to mitigate for potential impacts to CRLF and western pond turtle, heavy-duty wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC) should be installed along the grading limit of the proposed project site to prevent these species from entering the project site during construction activities. Exclusion fencing should be trenched into the ground at a minimum of 6 inches and a lip shall be folded along the upper portion of the fence line. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a Designated Biologist prior to vegetation clearing and fence installation. MM #8) Erosion Control – Grading and excavation activities could expose soil to increased rates of erosion during construction periods. During construction, runoff from the Property could adversely affect aquatic life within the adjacent water features. Surface water runoff could remove particles of fill or excavated soil from the site, or could erode soil down-gradient, if the flow were not controlled. Deposition of eroded material in adjacent water features could increase turbidity, thereby endangering aquatic life, and reducing wildlife habitat. Implementation of appropriate mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to aquatic organisms would be avoided or minimized. Mitigation measures may include best management practices (BMP’s) such as hay bales, silt fencing, placement of straw mulch and hydro seeding of exposed soils after construction as identified in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). 40 Habitat Conservation Plans - The proposed project does not lie within the East Contra Costa County HCP/NCCP or any other HCP/NCCP. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Local Ordinances - With implementation of the mitigation measures provided above, plus MM #2 provided above, the project is not expected to conflict with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, including the Contra Costa County tree protection and setback ordinances: • Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance – Chapter 816-6 – Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance discussed in Section 4.2.4 of this report • Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance – Chapter 914 – Rights-of-Ways and Setbacks discussed in Section 4.2.5 of this report 41 9.0 LITERATURE CITED California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Natural Diversity Data Base. 2021. Computer listings and map locations of historic and current recorded occurrences of special-status species and natural communities of special concern for USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map: Walnut Creek. Accessed on April 5, 2021. __________.2021a. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships. https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR/Wildlife-Habitats __________.2021b. State and federally listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare plants of California. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109390&inline __________.2021. Special animals. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Rare Plant Program. 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org Accessed April 5, 2021. CEQA. 2021. The California Environmental Quality Act. Appendix G, Environmental Checklist Form. Accessed on April 6, 2021. Available online at https://www.califaep.org/statute_and_guidelines.php Ehrlich, P.R., D.S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The Birder’s Handbook: a field guide to the natural history of North American birds. Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York. 785 pp. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition, Thoroughly Revised and Expanded. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. 2012. 1400 pp. Holland (1986) Preliminary Description of the Natural Communities of California. CDFW. Mayer, K. E. and Laudenslayer W.F. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. California. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Accessed April 5, 2021. Available on-line at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Pierce, Robert J. 1995. Wetland Delineation Lecture Notes. Wetland Training Institute, Inc., Poolesville, MD. WTI 95-2. 200pp. 42 Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. Evens. 2009. A manual of California vegetation. 2nd Ed. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. Skinner, M. W. and B. M. Pavlik (eds.). 1994. Inventory of rare and endangered vascular plants of California. California Native Plant Society Special Publication No. 1 (5th edition). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. 338 pp. Sibley, D.A. 2000. The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred Knopf, New York. Sibley, C.G., and B.L. Munroe, Jr. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale University Press, New Haven and London. 1111 pp. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. Endangered and threatened plant and animal species. Accessed on April 6, 2021. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/listedSpecies/speciesListingsByTaxGroupTotalsPage __________. 2019. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; review of plant and animal taxa that are Candidates or Proposed for listing as Endangered or Threatened; annual notice of findings on recycled petitions; annual description of progress on listing actions; proposed rule. Federal Register 68: 54732-54757. __________. 2007. Bald Eagle Management Guidelines and Conservation Measures. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Accessed on April 6, 2021. Available on-line at http://www.fws.gov/northeast/ecologicalservices/pdf/NationalBaldEagleManagementGui delines.pdf. _________. 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Designation of Critical Habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog, and Special Rule Exemption Assocaited with Final Listing for Existing Routine Ranching Activities; Final Rule. Federal Register 71: 19244- 19346. _________. 2004. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Determination of Threatened Status for the California Tiger Salamander; and Special Rule Exemption for Existing Routine Ranching Activities; Final Rule. Federal Register 69: 47212-47248. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Map Figure 2 Vicinity Map Figure 3 USGS Quadrangle Map Figure 4 Aerial Photograph Figure 5 CNDDB Map of Special Status Wildlife Figure 6 CNDDB Map of Special Status Plants Figure 7 USFWS Designated Critical Habitat Figure 8 Soils Map Figure 9 Photo Location Map Figure 10 Habitat Map Figure 11 Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank Figure 1 Regional Map ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 1: Regional MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 4 82Miles Scale:1:250,000 1 in = 4 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig1_Regional.mxd ^_Property LocationPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 2 Vicinity Map 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 2: Vicinity MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1,000 2,000500Feet Scale:1:12,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig2_Vicinity.mxd Survey BoundaryPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 3 USGS Quadrangle Map 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 3: USGS Topographic MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1,000 2,000500Feet Scale:1:12,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig3_USGS.mxd Survey BoundaryPrint at 8.5" x 11" Walnut Creek USGS 7.5' Quadrangle 37.947601°, -122.095188° T01N, R02W, S9 Figure 4 Aerial Photograph 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 4: Aerial MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig4_Aerial.mxd Survey BoundaryPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 5 CNDDB Map of Special Status Wildlife ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 5: CNDDB Wildlife MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Scale:1:100,000 1 in = 2 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig5_CNDDB Wildlife.mxd ^_Property Location 5-mile bufferCNDDB Wildlife Alameda whipsnake American peregrine falcon Bridges' coast range shoulderband California linderiella California red-legged frog California tiger salamander Northern California legless lizard Suisun song sparrow Townsend's big-eared bat big free-tailed bat burrowing owl foothill yellow-legged frog hoary bat obscure bumble bee pallid bat salt-marsh harvest mouse tricolored blackbird western bumble bee western pond turtle yellow railPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 6 CNDDB Map of Special Status Plants ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 6: CNDDB Plants MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Scale:1:100,000 1 in = 2 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig6_CNDDB Plants.mxd ^_Property Location 5-mile bufferCNDDB Plants Antioch Dunes evening-primrose Bolander's water-hemlock Carquinez goldenbush Congdon's tarplant Contra Costa goldfields Delta tule pea Diablo helianthella Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern San Joaquin spearscale bent-flowered fiddleneck big tarplant long-styled sand-spurrey oval-leaved viburnum soft salty bird's-beakPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 7 USFWS Designated Critical Habitat ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 7: USFWS Designated Critical Habitat MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Scale:1:100,000 1 in = 2 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig7_CritHab.mxd ^_Property Location 5-mile buffer Alameda whipsnake California red-legged frog Delta smeltPrint at 8.5" x 11" Unit: 1 Unit: CCS-1 Unit: 4 Unit: CCS-2A Unit: 2 Unit: 6 Figure 8 Soils Map TaD CeA 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 8: Soils MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig8_Soils.mxd Survey BoundarySSURGO Soil Type CeA: Conejo clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, MLRA 14 TaD: Tierra loam, 9 to 16 percent slopes, MLRA 14Print at 8.5" x 11" Figure 9 Photo Location Map °!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!( 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 9: Photo Points MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig9_PhotoPoints.mxd Survey Boundary °!(Photo PointsPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 10 Habitat Map 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 10: Habitat MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig10_Habitats.mxd Survey BoundaryHabitat Type Creek Developed Woodland Mixed Oak WoodlandPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 11 Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 11: Drip Line ExhibitGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I0 50 10025Feet Scale:1:600 1 inch = 50 feet Revision Date: 2/7/2022 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig1_Top-of-Bank&Drip Line Exhibit-2-07-2022.mxd Property Boundary Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank Top-of-Bank Print at 8.5" x 11" Aerial Imagery: Drone Flight Orthomosaic - 10/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig1_Top-of-Bank&Drip Line Exhibit-2-07-2022.mxd ATTACHMENT 2 SITE PLANS G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 PLAN 1 LOT 2 PLAN 3 LOT 3 PLAN 3 LOT 4 PLAN 2 LOT 5 PLAN 1LOT 6 PLAN 3 LOT 7 PLAN 3 LOT 8 PLAN 3 LOT 9 PLAN 2 LOT 10 PLAN 3* 1" = 20' VTM-7 BUILDING LAYOUT CONCEPTUAL No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 Date: Job No.: By: Scale: 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COM 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 08/20/21 EM 19300 ATTACHMENT 3 TABLES Table 1 Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Table 1 Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Scientific Name Common Name Plant Species Observed Salix spp. Willow species Aesculus californica California buckeye Avena fatua Wild oat Galium aparine Cleavers Ulmus pumila Siberian Elm Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome Vinca major Periwinkle Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle Claytonia perfoliata Miner’s lettuce Medicago polymoprha Bur clover Festuca perennis Italian rye grass Oxalis pes-caprae Bermuda buttercup Torilis arvensis Field hedgeparsley Sequoia sempervirens Coast redwood Pyrus communis Common pear Prunus cerasifera Cherry plum Calocedrus spp. Cedar Hedera helix English ivy Vicia sativa Common vetch Plantago lanceolata English plantain Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak Quercus lobata Valley oak Juglans nigra Black walnut Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry Silybum marianum Milk thistle Toxicodendron diversilobum Western poison oak Pinus radiata Monterey pine Umbellularia californica California bay laurel Eucalyptus globulus Blue gum Animal Species Observed Birds Aphelocoma californica Western scrub jay Table 1 Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Scientific Name Common Name Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Cathartes aura Turkey vulture Cyanocitta stelleri Steller’s Jay Junco hyemalis Dark-eyed junco Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker Melozone crissalis California towhee Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s hawk Buteo lineatus Red-shouldered hawk Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow Reptiles Sceloporus occidentalis Western fence lizard Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps1 Common Name/Scientific Name Status (Fed/State/ CNPS)2 Blooming or Survey Period Habitats of Occurrence Potential on Site Status on Site** PLANTS Antioch Dunes Evening Primrose (Oenothera deltoides ssp. howellii) E/E/1B March – September Inland dunes. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Bent-flower Fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris) -/-/1B March – June Coastal bluff scrub, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Big tarplant (Blepharizonia plumosa) -/-/1 July - October Valley grassland, foothill woodland, chaparral. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Bolander’s Water-Hemlock (Cicuta maculata var. bolanderi) -/-/2B July – September Coastal, salt marsh and wetland riparian. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent California Linderiella (Linderiella occidentalis) SOC/-/- December – May (dependent on the timing of winter and spring rains) Seasonal pools in unplowed grasslands with old alluvial soils underlain by hardpan or in sandstone depressions. Water in the pools has very low alkalinity and conductivity. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Carquinez Goldenbush (Isocoma arguta) -/-/1B August – December Alkaline valley and foothill grassland. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps1 Common Name/Scientific Name Status (Fed/State/ CNPS)2 Blooming or Survey Period Habitats of Occurrence Potential on Site Status on Site** Congdon’s Tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii) -/-/1B June – November Valley and foothill grasslands in alkaline soils. Moderate Suitable habitat present. Presumed absent Contra Costa Goldfields (Lasthenia conjugens) E/-/1B March – June Valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland, and vernal pools, swales, and low depressions in open grassy areas. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Delta Tule Pea (Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsonii) -/-/1B May – July Freshwater wetlands, wetland-riparian, freshwater marsh, brackish marsh. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Diablo Helianthella (Helianthella castanea) -/-/1B March – June Broadleafed upland forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Usually in chaparral/oak woodland interface in rocky, azonal soils, often in partial shade. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Hall’s Bush-Mallow (Malacothamnus hallii) -/-/1B May – September Chaparral, coastal scrub. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Long-Styled Sand Spurrey (Spergularia macrotheca longistyla) -/-/1B February – May Alkaline meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps1 Common Name/Scientific Name Status (Fed/State/ CNPS)2 Blooming or Survey Period Habitats of Occurrence Potential on Site Status on Site** Mount Diablo Fairy-Lantern (Calochortus pulchellus) -/-/1B April – June Chaparral, cismontane woodland, riparian woodland, and valley and foothill grassland; on wooded and brushy slopes. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Oval-Leaved Viburnum (Viburnum ellipticum) -/-/2B May – June Chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur San Joaquin spearscale (Atriplex joaquiniana) -/-/1B April-October Chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, valley and foothill grassland in seasonal alkali wetlands or alkali sink scrub with Distichlis spicata, Frankenia, etc. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Soft Salty Bird’s Beak (Chloropyron molle ssp. molle) E/R/1B July – November Coastal salt marsh, wetland-riparian. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent BIRDS American Kestrel (Falco sparverius) -/CP/- February – August Various grassland habitats, urban land, oak woodlands with grassland for foraging. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur American Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) -/-CP/- February – August Nests near wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other water. On cliffs, banks, dunes, mounds, and human-made structures. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) SOC/-/SC February – August Dry open annual or perennial grassland, desert and scrubland. Uses abandoned mammal burrows for nesting. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) -/CP/- February – August Oak woodlands, coniferous forests, riparian corridors. Often hunts on edges between habitats. High Suitable habitat present Present Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis) -/CP/- Late Fall – Winter Open country such as semiarid grasslands with few trees, rocky outcrops, and open valleys. Also along streams or in agricultural areas during migration. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) -/CP/SC February – August Nests in cliff-walled canyons and tall trees in open areas. (Nesting and wintering) Rolling foothills mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert. Low No suitable habitat present Not Likely to Occur Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) ROOKERIES -/-/- February – August (Rookery) Nests in tall trees in close proximity to foraging areas such as marshes and streams. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Great Egret (Ardea alba) ROOKERIES -/-/- February – August Freshwater, brackish and marine wetlands. Form breeding colonies on lakes, ponds, marshes, estuaries or islands. Forage in marshes, swamps, streams, rivers, ponds, tidal flats, canals and flooded fam fields. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) -/CP/- February – August Forages in variety of semi-developed habitats including orchards. Forages in woodlands and riparian areas. Nests in riparian habitat but also eucalyptus groves. High Suitable habitat present Present Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) -/CP/- February – August Various grassland habitats, urban land, oak woodlands with grassland for foraging. High Suitable habitat present Present Sharp-Shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus) -/CP/- February – August Oak woodlands, coniferous forests, riparian corridors. Often hunts on edges between habitats. (Nesting) Ponderosa pine, black oak, riparian deciduous, mixed conifer, and Jeffrey pine habitats. Prefers riparian areas. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur Suisun Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia maxillaris) -/-/SC February – August Inhabits tidal salt marshes, needs vegetation for nesting sites. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsonii) -/T/- February – October Nests in riparian areas and in oak savannah near foraging areas. Forages in alfalfa and grain fields with rodent populations. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) SOC/-/SSC February – August Nesting within seasonal wetland marshes, blackberry brambles or other protected substrates. Forages in annual grassland and wetland habitats. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus) SOC/CP/FP February – August Various grassland habitats, urban land, oak woodlands with grassland for foraging. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Yellow Rail (Coturnicops noveboracensis) -/-/SSC February - August Salt or brackish marshes or wet meadows. Prefers habitats with tall, dense vegetation such as sedges or cattails. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent MAMMALS Big Free-Tailed Bat (Nyctinomops macrotis) -/-/SSC Resident Inhabits rocky or canyon country where it roosts in crevices. Arid landscapes such as desert shrub, woodlands and evergreen forests. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus) -/-/- Resident Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics with access to trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees near water. Feeds mainly on moths. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur Pallid Bat (Antrozous pallidus) -/SC/- N/A Forages in grasslands, shrublands, deserts, forests, and woodlands. Most common in open, dry habitats. Roosts in rock crevices, caves, tree hollows, and buildings. Roosts must protect bats from high temperatures; very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris) E/E/FP Resident Salt marshes with dense stands of pickleweed and other dense wetland vegetation such as cattails or bullrush. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) -/SSC/- Resident Throughout California in a wide variety of habitats; roosts in the open, hanging from walls and ceilings. Needs sites free from human disturbance. Most common in mesic sites. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Western Red Bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) -/-/SSC Resident Winter in western lowlands and coastal regions of the San Francisco Bay. Roosts in forests and woodlands. Feed in grasslands, shrublands, open woodlands and forests and croplands. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur Yuma Myotis (Myotis yumanensis) -/-/- Resident Optimal habitats are open forests and woodlands with sources of water over which to feed. Maternal colonies occur in caves, mines, buildings or crevices. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur AMPHIBIAN California Red-Legged Frog (Rana draytonii) T/-/SC May 1 – November 1 Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent deep water with dense, shrubby or emergent riparian habitat. Requires 11-20 weeks of permanent water for breeding and larval development. Must have access to aestivation habitat. Moderate Suitable dispersal habitat present May occur in a dispersal capacity only California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) T/T/- Aquatic Surveys - Once each in March, April, and May with at least 10 days between surveys. Upland Surveys - 20 nights of surveying under proper conditions beginning October 15 and ending March 15. Vernal pools, swales and depressions for breeding, needs underground refugia. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog (Rana boylii) SOC/-/SC Year-round resident Partially-shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Need cobble for egg- laying. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur REPTILE Alameda Whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) T/T/- Year-round resident Valley-foothill hardwood habitat of the coast ranges between Monterey and north San Francisco Bay areas. Inhabits south-facing slopes and ravines where shrubs form a vegetative mosaic with oak trees and grasses. Low Suitable dispersal habitat present May occur in a dispersal capacity only Western Pond Turtle (Emys marmorata) -/-/SC March – October Aquatic turtle needs permanent water in ponds, streams, irrigation ditches. Nests on sandy banks or grassy fields. Moderate Suitable dispersal habitat present May occur in a dispersal capacity only 1. Special-status plants and animals as reported by the California Natural Diversity Data Base, California Native Plant Society, and other background research April 2021 2. Order of Codes for Plants - Fed/State/CNPS Order of Codes for Animals - Fed/State/CDFW Codes: SOC - Federal Species of Concern SC - California Species of Special Concern E - Federally/State Listed as an Endangered Species T - Federally/State Listed as a Threatened Species C - Species listed as a Candidate for Federal Threatened or Endangered Status R - Rare D - Delisted CP- California protected FP - State Fully Protected DFG: SC California Special Concern species 1B - California Native Plant Society considers the plant Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. 1A - CNPS Plants presumed extinct in California. 2 - CNPS Plants Rare, Threatened or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. 3 - CNPS Plants on a review list to find more information about a particular species. 4 - CNPS Plants of limited distribution - a watch list. ATTACHMENT 4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 1. Photo taken facing south showing the two-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat at northwestern boundary of Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 2. Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat within the northeastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 3. Photo taken facing west showing riparian woodland habitat within the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 4. Photo taken facing northeast showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 5. Photo taken facing southeast showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat within the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 6. Photo taken facing south showing the single-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat located near the southern boundary of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 7. Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 8. Photo taken facing south showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 9. Photo taken facing southeast showing portion of Grayson Creek. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 10. Photo taken facing southeast showing Grayson Creek and associated riparian woodland corridor. Photo taken April 6, 2021. Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 11. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland with existing residential structure in the background. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 12. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland habitat in the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Traverso Tree Service Phone: 925-930-7901 • 4080 Cabrilho Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 • Fax: 925-723-2442 May 6, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) Andy Byde Calibr Ventures bydeandy@gmail.com RE: Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road Project Summary This report updates the 2006 arborist report with current tree assessment and measurements, and anticipated tree impact. Trees proposed for removal are estimated based on proposed grading and building footprints. Actual impacts may vary once homes are designed. A supplemental arborist report may be necessary at that time. This 10/17/22 revision adds 13 trees (#301-313) along the creek that were omitted in prior reports. The scope of work did not include review of updated plans and health/structure reassessment of other trees, though the locations of a few trees were adjusted. Site Summary A total of 130 trees > 6” in diameter were inventoried. It is my opinion that 97 trees will need to be removed to accommodate the proposed project. The remaining trees can be retained given that the protection measures within this report are followed. Assumptions & Limitations This report is based on my site visit on 5/4/20 & 10/11/22, and existing conditions & demolition plan by Debolt Civil Engineering dated 3/9/22 (plot date 10/13/22). It was assumed that the trees and the proposed improvements were accurately surveyed. Several trees were not surveyed or appear to be located incorrectly, so I roughly located them on the tree protection plan based on their proximity to adjacent surveyed trees. Since it was difficult to tell which trees were accurately located, the approximate locations will likely need to be resurveyed if precision is needed. The health and structure of the trees were assessed visually from ground level. No drilling, root excavation, or aerial inspections were performed. Internal or non-detectable defects may exist and could lead to part or whole tree failures. Due to the dynamic nature of trees and their environment, it is not possible for arborists to guarantee that trees will not fail in the future. Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 2 Tree Inventory & Assessment Table #s: Each tree was given a square metal tag with numbers ranging from 102-206 & circular tags from #301-313. (Note: as of 2022, tags are likely engulfed by trunk growth.) Trees with letters attached (a, b, or c) were new young trees that have grown up to protected size since the 2006 inventory. Their locations are shown on the attached the tree inventory plan. DBH (Diameter at Breast Height): Trunk diameters in inches were measured at 4.5’ above average grade with a diameter tape. Height of measurement may deviate slightly from the standard on atypical trunks. Health & Structural Condition Rating Dead: Dead or declining past chance of recovery. Poor (P): Stunted or declining canopy, poor foliar color, possible disease or insect issues. Severe structural defects that may or may not be correctable. Usually not a reliable specimen for preservation. Fair (F): Fair to moderate vigor. Minor structural defects that can be corrected. More susceptible to construction impacts than a tree in good condition. Good (G): Good vigor and color, with no obvious problems or defects. Generally more resilient to impacts. Very Good (VG): Exceptional specimen with excellent vigor and structure. Unusually nice. Dripline: Canopy radius was visually estimated in each cardinal direction. Age Young (Y): Within the first 20% of expected life span. High resiliency to encroachment. Mature (M): Between 20% - 80% of expected life span. Moderate resiliency to encroachment. Overmature (OM): In >80% of expected life span. Low resiliency to encroachment. DE: Dripline Encroachment (X indicates encroachment) CI: Anticipated Construction Impact (L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High) Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 3 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 101 Coast live oak This tree no longer exists. Old report stated it as a 9” tree. No evidence of a stump was found. N/A 102 Valley oak 16 G-F G 20 25 20 20 Y X M Epicormic sprouts along scaffold branches. Within west p/l set back, some grading will likely occur within dripline. Save Set protection fencing at dripline (d/l), and have arborist on site for any d/l encroachment. 103 Fruiting pear 10, 5, 5, 4, 4 P P 10 0 10 10 OM X H Declining tree. In proposed driveway Remove 104 Valley oak 18, 19, 20, 12 G G 30 30 30 30 M X H Co-dominant stems at 3'. In proposed driveway. Remove 105 Coast live oak 11, 7, 6 F-P F 15 15 10 0 M X H Co-dominant stems. Understory tree. Within building footprint. Remove 106 Valley oak 11, 12 G F 25NW-W M X H Co-dominant stems. Within building footprint. Remove 107 Valley oak 4, 3, 12, 11, 5, 7, 5 G F 25 0 18 25 M X H Basal shoot from old stump. In proposed driveway. Within building footprint. Remove 107 B Coast live oak 11, 5, 8 F P 15 0 0 25 M X H Growing out from base of #107. Co-dominant trunks. Within building footprint. Remove 108 Coast live oak 17 F F 25NW-W M X H Curved trunk. Within building footprint. Remove 109 Valley oak 12, 11, 7, 6 F F 30N M X H One sided tree to the N/W. Dieback & epicormic sprouting. Within building footprint. Remove 110 Valley oak 20, 11, 11, 16 G F 25 25 0 25 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within building footprint. Remove 111 Coast live oak 19 F-P F 20 25 20 20 M X H Bark inclusion on all 3 attachments. Sparse with stunted growth. Within building footprint. Remove 112 Coast live oak 11 F P 0 6 10 10 Y X H Top broken at 12' with sprouting. Within building footprint. Remove 113 Valley oak 7 F P 6S Y X H Sparse canopy, 2 trunks removed. Within building footprint. Remove 114 Valley oak 7, 4 F F 6 6 6 6 Y X H Crowded. Within building footprint. Remove 115 Coast live oak 13 G G 12 0 8 10 Y X H 3" from base of #116; crowded. Within building footprint. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 4 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 116 Valley oak 7, 6 F F 18N Y X H Very crowded. Co-dominant trunks; sweeping lean to N. Within building footprint. Remove 117 Coast live oak 17 F-P F-P 15NE M L Sparse understory tree. Outside of grading limits. Save 118 Valley oak 14, 18 F F 15 15 20 20 M L Co-dominant stem bends to N. Outside of grading limits. Save 119 Coast live oak 17 Dead Remove. 120 Coast live oak 17 F-P F 10 10 10 10 M L Ivy covering trunk. In decline; sycamore borer damage. Treat for Borer. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 121 Valley oak 13 F F 20S Y L Ivy covering trunk. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 122 Valley oak 22 P P 25N M L Ivy covering trunk. Declining canopy; sweeping lean to N. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 122 A Coast live oak 30 F F 50N M L In creek structure setback. Significant lean to N. Ivy covering trunk. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 123 Valley oak 14, 7, 7, 10, 10 F F 0 25 0 15 M X H Sparse canopy. Co-dominant stems at 6'. Within grading limits Remove 124 Valley oak 16 F G 15 20 15 8 M X H Tag embedded in trunk. Epicormic sprouts. Within grading limits Remove 124 B Coast live oak 7 F P 6 10 4 0 Y X H 90° correcting bend in trunk. Within grading limits Remove 125 Chinese pistache 27 G G 25 25 25 25 OM X H Dieback; slightly drought stressed. Within grading limits Remove 126 Chinese pistache 17, 17, 10, 8 F G 25 25 25 6 OM X H Within grading limits Remove 127 Coast live oak 17 G G 15 0 0 20 M X H Within grading limits Remove 128 Valley oak 19 G F 20 25 0 20 M X H Within grading limits Remove 129 Valley oak 14 G F 0 20 20 20 Y X H Within grading limits Remove 130 Coast live oak 16 F G 15 15 10 0 Y X H Sparse lower canopy. Within grading limits Remove 131 Calif. Buckeye 11, 8 F F 15 20 25 20 M X H Dead lower/interior canopy. Within grading limits Remove 131 B Valley oak 18 F F 35N M X H Not surveyed. 35° lean to N. Ivy and poison oak covering trunk. Within grading limits Remove 132 Coast live oak 11 F F 40N Y X H 10° lean to N. Tag engulfed by trunk. Within grading limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 5 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 133 Coast live oak 14 G F 40N-20NW Y X H 10° lean to N. Within grading limits Remove 134 Monterey pine 50 P F 50 50 50 50 OM X M Over mature tree, in declining years. Sparse canopy. Removed 135 Coast redwood 18, 18, 10 F G 20 20 20 20 M X H Drought stressed, needs irrigation. Within grading limits. Remove 135 A Calif. Buckeye 6, 8, 11, 7, 7, 9, 11, 8 G G 20 20 20 20 M L Within creek structure set back. ~3 trunk clusters treated as one. Save 136 Silver dollar eucalyptus (Eucalyptus cinerea) 13, 16 F F 25 15 10 0 M X H Failed trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 137 Coast live oak 40 G-F P 35 35 35 35 M X M- H Ivy covering trunk. Co-dominant stems at 4' with included bark. Grading just north of trunk proposed. Pull grade limits at least 15’ from trunk in order to save tree. Save If grading can be adjusted. 138 Valley oak 18 F F 15 15 5 0 M X M- H Ivy covering trunk. Grading just north of trunk. Recommend pulling grade limits at least 10’ from trunk. Save If grading can be adjusted 138 B Buckeye 17, 12, 13, 14, 15, 13, 12, 10, 10, 13 F-P/P F 20 20 20 20 M L In creek structure setback. Top dieback. Save 139 Mimosa Dead Within grading limits. Remove 140 Coast live oak 17 G G 18 18 18 18 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 141 Coast live oak 9 G G 10 10 10 10 Y X H Tag embedded in trunk but readable. Within grading limits. Remove 142 Coast live oak 19, 20 G F 30 30 10 10 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within grading limits. Remove 142 B Coast live oak 20 G F 30 0 0 20 M X H In creek structure setback. Within grading limits. Remove 142 C Coast live oak 14 G G 20 15 0 0 Y X H Not surveyed. 143 Valley oak 15 G-F G 12 12 12 12 Y X H Ivy on trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 144 Valley oak 11 G F 15SE Y X H Ivy on trunk. Understory tree. Within grading limits. Remove 145 Coast live oak 22 G-F G 25 20 18 20 M X H Ivy on trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 146 Coast live oak 18, 15 G F 25 0 20 25 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within grading limits. Remove 147 Fruiting plum Dead X H Within grading limits. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 6 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 148 Persimmon 6, 7 G P 6 15SE 5 M X H Leaders poorly attached, breaking apart. Within grading limits. Remove 149 Black Walnut 7, 6 G F 8 15 15 0 Y X H Within grading limits. Remove 149 B Valley oak 7 G F 25NE Y X H Not surveyed. Within grading limits. Remove 150 Coast live oak 19 G F 0 25 20 20 M X H One stem topped by PG&E, Poor location. Within grading limits. Remove 151 Coast live oak 15 F-P P 25N-NE 0 20 Y X H Topped by PG&E. Sparse canopy and deadwood. Within proposed driveway Remove 152 Coast live oak 15 G F 10 15 0 0 Y X H Sided by PG&E. Within proposed driveway. Remove 153 Valley oak 20, 15 G F 10 25 30 30 M X H Somewhat lions tailed, branches elongated to S. Within grading and sewer easement. Remove 154 Valley oak 13 G G-F 10 0 20 20 Y X M- H 1' from existing gravel driveway. Trunk buried. At edge grading limits. Arborist on site for grading. Save Arborist to pull fill back from base of tree. 155 Coast live oak 11 G F 8 12 15 0 Y X H Topped by PG&E. Within proposed driveway. Remove 156 Coast live oak 9 G F 6 8 6 0 Growing up under PG&E wires. Within proposed driveway. Remove 157 Coast live oak 10 G F 10 0 10 18 Y X L Off-site. Trunk buried. 1.5' from existing gravel driveway. Grading at edge of dripline. Save Arborist to pull fill back from base of tree. 158 Chinese pistache 12 F F 15 12 0 10 M X H Partially topped. Within grading for road. Remove 159 Coast live oak 8 G F-P 12NW Y X L Off-site. Trunk buried. Sided by PG&E. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 160 Valley oak 7 G F 8 8 0 0 Y X L Off-site. Co-dominant stems at 7'. Topped by PG&E. Trunk buried. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 160 B Coast live oak 7 G F 15N-NE Y X L Off-site; not surveyed. Lean to NE. 6" NW of #160. . Grading at edge of dripline. Save 161 Iron bark euc. 11, 7 Previously removed. Suspect by PG&E (under wires) N/A 162 Coast live oak 15, 11 G P 15 15 15 15 M X L Topped by PG&E, co-dominant stems. Grading for road at edge of dripline. Save 163 Coast live oak 11 G G 6 6 6 6 Y X L Reduced by PG&E. Grading at edge of dripline Save 164 Incense cedar 15 F F 7 7 7 7 M X H Sweeping S shaped trunk. Within proposed road. Remove 165 Incense cedar Removed. N/A 166 Coast live oak 19, 20 G-F F 30 30 30 0 M X H Co-dominant stems. Moderate sycamore borer. Within grading limits. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 7 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 166 B Siberian elm 7, 11 F-P P 18 0 0 18 M X H Not surveyed. Co-dominant stems at 2'. Within grading limits. Remove 166 C Siberian elm 9, 8, 7 P P 20 0 0 20 M X H Not surveyed. Basal sprouts; decay. Within grading limits. Remove 167 Black walnut 9, 4, 4 F F 20 0 0 20 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 168 Black walnut 8 P P 20NW Y X H Understory tree; no growth in past 14 years. Within grading limits. Remove 169 Coast live oak 20 G F 35 20 20 20 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 169 B Coast live oak 9 G F 30NW Y X H Not surveyed. Understory tree. 40° phototropic lean to NW. Within grading limits. Remove 170 Coast live oak 14 G G 8 8 8 8 Y X H Trunk buried. Within grading limits. Remove 171 Coast live oak 14 F-P F 35N-NW Y X H Ivy around base, upper branches are damaged by a fungal canker at 15'. On creek bank well. Within grading limits. Remove 171 B Coast live oak 14 G G 35NW Y X H In creek structure setback. 40° lean to NW. Within grading limits. Remove 172 Monterey pine 48 F-P F-P 30 30 30 30 OM X H 5° lean to N/W. Grading up to base of tree. Only 3-5 years of anticipated lifespan left. Remove 173 Calif. Buckeye 14, 14, 8, 8, 8, 7, 7, 5 G F 35 20 0 20 M X M- H Low branching (trunks laying on ground). Grading limits well within N/W dripline. Pull grade limits back so 15’ from trunk. Save Assuming grade limits can be adjusted. 173 B Calif. Buckeye 11, 12 G F 10 10 10 10 M L In creek structure setback. Ivy covering tree. Save 173 C Coast live oak 8 F P 25N Y X L- M Understory tree with heavy lean (trunk horizontal before correcting) to NW. Young tree with some dripline grading encroachment. Save 174 Black walnut 23 F-P F 20 20 20 25 M X H Low branching, old mistletoe in canopy; dieback. Within grade limits. Remove 175 Siberian elm 17, 17, 15 P P 20 20 20 20 M X H Tree in decline, poorly structured. Within grade limits. Remove 176 Coast redwood 30 F/F-P G 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought-stressed. Within grade limits. Remove 177 Coast redwood 26 F/F-P G 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought-stressed. Within grade limits. Remove 177 B Valley oak 11 G G 8 8 8 8 Y X H Not surveyed. Chain on trunk. Within grade limits. Remove 178 Valley oak 14, 6 G F 15 15 20 20 Y X H Lean to SW. Within grade limits. Remove 178 B Valley oak 8 G F 12 12 0 0 Y Not surveyed. Within grade limits. Remove 179 Calif. Buckeye 8, 7, 6 G G 12 12 12 12 M X H Within grade limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 8 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 180 Mulberry 18 P P 0 10 10 0 OM X H Previously topped. Within grade limits. Remove 181 Valley oak 11 F F 15NE-NW Y L Grading just outside dripline. Save 182 Valley oak 11 F F 15S Y X L- M Grading at edge of dripline. Save 183 Valley oak 13 F F 20 NE 15 0 0 Y X L- M Grading at edge of dripline. Save 184 Black walnut 8, 8, 7 P P 8 8 8 8 M X H Declining health. Within grade limits. Remove 185 Valley oak 11 F F 18 NE 10 0 0 Y X L- M S shaped trunk. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 186 Calif. Buckeye 7, 7, 6, 6, 5, 5, 5 G G 18 18 18 18 M X M Tangled with mulberry, and walnut. Grading withn dripline. Save Arborist on site during grading. 187 Mulberry 18 P P 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought stressed, tangled with buckeye. Within grading limits. Remove 188 Black walnut 9 F F 20S Y X H Competing with buckeye, recommend removal. Within grade limits. Remove 188 B Coast live oak 11 F G 12 12 12 12 Y X H Not surveyed. Within storm treatment area. Remove 188 C Coast live oak 11 G G 6 0 10 15 Y X H Not surveyed. Within storm treatment area. Remove 189 Calif. Buckeye 9, 9, 8, 7, 7, 5, 5, 5, 3, 3, 3 G G 15 20 25 20 M X L- M Grading limits at edge of dripline. Save 190 Mulberry 16 Dead Remove. 191 Coast live oak 14 G G 10 10 10 10 Y L Grade limits just outside dripline. Save 191 B Coast live oak 11, 9 F F 18NE-NW M L Not surveyed. Lean over road. Save 192 Mulberry 19 P P 8 8 8 8 OM X H Drought stressed. In decline. Within grade limits. Remove 192 A Coast live oak 17 G F 18 NE 10 10 18 NW M L In creek structure setback. Reduced by PG&E. By street, lifting asphalt curb. Save 192 B Willow 20, 20 P P 15 0 0 0 OM L Outside northeast property corner along Grayson. Topped by PG&E; sparse canopy. Recommend removal Remove 192 C Willow 24 F P 0 0 25 30 SW OM L Outside northeast property corner along Grayson. Uprooted to S. Fallen tree. Remove 193 Siberian elm 12, 12, 10, 5, 5, 4 P P 8 8 8 8 M X H Dying tree. Within grading limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 9 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 194 Siberian elm 12, 9, 4 P P 0 15 15 15 M X H Dying tree. Within grade limits. Remove 194 B Coast live oak 9 G F 15N Y X H Not surveyed. Up against elm. Remove 195 Siberian elm 13, 4 P P 20N M X H Declining health. Within grade limits. Remove 196 Coast live oak 19 G F 20 NW 0 20 20 M L Sweeping trunk Save 197 Bush eucalyptus 10, 8, 8 Dead M L Dead/failed. Fire hazard. Remove 198 Bush eucalyptus 15, 15 P P 10N M L Dying, fire hazard. Remove 199 Blue gum euc. 50 F F-P 25 20 20 20 M L 10" branch failure to N in 2006; minor sprouting from failure. Prune for safety if targets within 50ft. Save 200 Bush eucalyptus 18, 5, 6 F P 15S M L Declining health. Recent failures. Prune for safety. Save 201 Monterey pine 24 F P 20 20 20 20 OM L Over mature tree, badly included co-dominant stems. Anticipate short life span, recommend removal. Remove 202 Monterey pine 22 P P 0 20 20 0 OM L Over mature tree, declining health. Recommend removal. Remove 203 Monterey pine Removed. N/A 204 Monterey pine 18 F P 25E M L Poorly tapered trunk; lean to E. Recommend removal. Remove 205 Monterey pine Removed. N/A 206 Calif. Buckeye 15, 15, 10, 10 G G 25 25 25 25 M L Healthy tree. Save 301 Calif. Buckeye 10, 10 G G-F 8 12 10 12 M X H Co-dominant trunks. In proposed grading. Remove. 302 Coast live oak 9 F/F-P F-P 25N- 20NE Y X H Dominated by poison oak and ivy. In proposed grading. Remove. 303 Valley oak 19 G-F F 25N M X H Corrected phototropic lean (about 20’ above grade). Slightly sparse canopy. Ivy & poison oak dominating lower trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 304 Coast live oak 20 G F 15 6 10 25 M X H Ivy climbing trunk. Canopy in upper half. In proposed grading. Remove. 305 Valley oak 19.5 F-P/P F-P 25N M X H Dead secondary stem at base, branches dead to very top. Remaining canopy sparse & stunted with deadwood. In proposed grading. Remove. 306 Valley oak 12 P P 30N M- OM X H Lower branches dead. Remaining canopy very sparse and stunted, concentrated at top of tree about 15’ N of trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 307 Coast live oak 24 G G-F 20 20 15 15 M X H Ivy climbing trunk. Trunk has slight kink to E at 6’ but has reoriented vertically. Canopy in upper half of tree. In proposed grading. Remove. Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 10 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 308 Coast live oak 13, 16, 7 G-F F/F-P 30N M X H Multiple co-dominant trunks. Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/4. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 309 Coast live oak 11 G-F F-P 25N Y-M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/6. In proposed grading. In proposed grading. Remove. 310 Coast live oak 10 F P 0 0 8 12 Y-M X H 1/3 canopy dead, remaining branch extends to W. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 311 Coast live oak 21 F F 30N M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/3, slightly corrected lean In proposed grading. Remove. 312 Coast live oak 28 G-F F/F-P 30N M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/4. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 313 Valley oak 9 F-P F 30NW Y X H Phototropic lean to NW, ivy. In proposed grading. Remove. Tree Encroachment Summary A total of 130 trees were inventoried. At least four additional trees (#101, 134, 203 & 205) that were shown on the survey were removed since the original site visit. • Trees that will need to be removed: #’s 103-116, 119, 123-135, 136, 139-153, 155-156, 158, 164, 166-172, 174-180, 184, 187-188c, 190, 192, 192b-195, 197, 198, 201-201, 301-313 (97 trees) • Trees to be saved that will be subjected to dripline encroachment, and will need arborist supervision during grading within driplines: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189 (17 trees) • Additional trees to be saved that will not have dripline encroachment: #’s 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 122a, 135a, 173a, 181, 191, 191b, 192a, 196, 199, 200, 266 (16 trees) Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 11 Tree Protection Recommendations (to be printed on site plans) Pre- Grading Phase • Remove trees #103-116, 119, 123-135, 136, 139-153, 155-156, 158, 164, 166-172, 174- 180, 184, 187-188c, 190, 192, 192b-195, 197, 198, 201-201, 301-313 (97 trees) • Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. • Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. • TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase • The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. • Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. • If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. • Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. • Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. • Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase (if applicable) • The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. • Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. • Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. • Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. • All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. • All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak- compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 12 Thank you for the opportunity to provide this report, and please do not hesitate to contact me if there are any questions or concerns. Please see attached tree inventory plan. Sincerely, John C Traverso ISA Board Certified Master Arborist #WE0206-B ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified TCIA Certified Tree Care Safety Professional #01802 (10/17/22 Revision by Jennifer Tso Board Certified Master Arborist #WE-10270B ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified) THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS ADDENDUM GRAYSON ROAD 10-LOT SUBDIVISION PROJECT Contra Costa County, California December 2022 Prepared by: Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Ms. Sadie McGarvey 433 Visitacion Ave Brisbane, California 94005 Prepared for: Calibr Ventures Mr. Andy Byde PO Box 1162 Alamo, CA 94507 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Biological Resource Analysis Contents SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT ................................................................................................................1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ...............................................................................................................................1 1.3 PROPOSED PROJECT ..............................................................................................................................1 1.4 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND DURATION.....................................................................................................2 SECTION 2. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS .......................................................................3 2.1 RIPARIAN ...............................................................................................................................................3 2.2 UPLAND WOODLANDS ...........................................................................................................................4 2.2.1 Mixed Woodland ................................................................................................................................................ 4 2.2.2 Valley Oak Woodland ...................................................................................................................................... 4 SECTION 3. POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SPECIAL-STATUS HABITATS ................................................5 3.1 APPLICABLE LAWS .................................................................................................................................5 3.2 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................................5 3.3 AQUATIC RESOURCES .............................................................................................................................5 3.4 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS AND NURSERY SITES .........................................................................................5 3.5 SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES .....................................................................................................6 3.6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................6 3.6.1 Aquatic Resources ............................................................................................................................................. 6 3.6.2 Wildlife Corridors and Nursery Sites ........................................................................................................ 6 3.6.3 Sensitive Natural Communities ................................................................................................................... 7 SECTION 4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES .....................................................8 4.1 APPLICABLE LAWS .................................................................................................................................8 4.2 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................................8 4.3 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS ......................................................................................................................8 4.4 SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE ..................................................................................................................8 4.5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................8 4.5.1 Special-Status Plants ....................................................................................................................................... 8 4.5.2 Special-Status Wildlife .................................................................................................................................... 9 SECTION 5. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN POLICIES ................................................... 10 5.1 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE POLICIES .............................................................................................. 10 5.1.1 Policy 8-6 ............................................................................................................................................................10 5.1.2 Policy 8-7 ............................................................................................................................................................10 5.1.3 Policies 8-8, 8-9, and 8-10............................................................................................................................10 5.1.4 Policy 8-12 ..........................................................................................................................................................11 5.1.5 Policy 8-13 ..........................................................................................................................................................11 5.1.6 Policy 8-21 ..........................................................................................................................................................11 5.1.7 Policy 8-23 ..........................................................................................................................................................11 5.2 WATER RESOURCE POLICIES .............................................................................................................. 12 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 5.2.1 Policy 8-78 ..........................................................................................................................................................12 5.2.2 Policy 8-86 ..........................................................................................................................................................12 5.2.3 Policy 8-87 ..........................................................................................................................................................12 5.2.4 Policy 8-89 ..........................................................................................................................................................12 5.2.5 Policy 8-91 ..........................................................................................................................................................13 SECTION 6. MITIGATION MEASURES ..................................................................................................... 14 6.1 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 2: RIPARIAN HABITAT ..................................................................................... 14 6.1.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-2A (Minor Revision to Olberding BRA MM #2) ...............................14 6.1.2 Mitigation Measure BIO-2B (Addition to Olberding BRA MM #2) ............................................14 6.2 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 3: NESTING BIRDS ............................................................................................ 14 6.2.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-3 (Minor Revision to Olberding BRA MM #3) ..................................14 6.3 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 4: ROOSTING BATS........................................................................................... 15 6.3.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-4 (Replacement of Olberding BRA MM #4) ......................................15 6.4 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 9: VALLEY OAK WOODLAND ........................................................................... 16 6.4.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-9A ........................................................................................................................16 6.4.2 Mitigation Measure BIO-9B ........................................................................................................................16 6.5 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 10: SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS ......................................................................... 16 6.5.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-10 ........................................................................................................................17 SECTION 7. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 18 List of Figures Figure 1. Site and Vicinity Map Figure 2. Project Components Map Figure 3. Habitat Map List of Attachments Attachment A. Biological Resources Analysis Report for the Grayson Road Property (prepared by Olberding Environmental, Inc dated February 2022) Attachment B. Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road (prepared by Traverso Tree Service) Attachment C. Representative Site Photos Depicting Riparian and Upland Woodlands 1 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT The purpose of this Biological Resource Analysis (BRA) Addendum is to consolidate previous efforts and add additional detail and analysis to complete a review of potential effects of the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project (Project) on biological resources in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code, Division 13, Section 2100 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.). The analysis herein considers the Project location in conjunction with proposed work activities, as described at the time of this analysis, to consider potential Project-related impacts on the natural environment. A BRA Report for the Grayson Road Property was prepared by Olberding Environmental, Inc dated February 2022 (Olberding BRA) (Attachment A). This BRA Addendum for the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project incorporates findings from the Olberding BRA and expands upon the analysis provided therein regarding potential Project-impacts to biological resources. In addition to the Olberding BRA, this BRA Addendum provides a complete analysis of potential impacts to biological resources that could be incurred as a result of Project implementation, consistent with CEQA requirements. 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION The 3.05-acre Project site is located at 1028 Grayson Road, immediately south of the intersection of Grayson Road and Buttner Road, in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California (approximate center of the property is located at 37.94749146° N, 122.09525324° W) (Figure 1). The Project is located on the Walnut Creek Quadrangle within Section 9, Township 1N, and Range 2W. The Project site consists of parcels (Accessor Parcel Numbers 166-030-001 and -002). 1.3 PROPOSED PROJECT Calibr Ventures proposes to construct a small residential subdivision consisting of 10 four- to five-bedroom single family homes, as well as associated access, drainage, and utility facilities, including a detention basin. Implementation of the proposed Project would include the demolition of two abandoned residences and ancillary structures and the removal of 97 trees. Project implementation would include the demolition and removal of all existing onsite structures, mass grading of the northern 2.08 acres of the Project site, and construction of project components. Offsite construction activities include the grading of approximately 0.05 acre along the northern parcel boundary to accommodate site leveling. The proposed Project was designed to include a creek setback to avoid impacts to the adjacent Grayson Creek to the greatest extent feasible. The proposed Project has been designed to incorporate a creek setback that includes above-ground permanent elements such as roads/driveways and structures to be constructed a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of Grayson Creek (as mapped by Debolt Civil Engineering) (Figure 2). 2 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 1.4 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND DURATION Project construction is expected to take up to two years to complete and is anticipated to commence in Spring of 2023. Construction work for the Project would be completed during daylight hours. 3 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 SECTION 2. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Based on reconnaissance level site visits performed by JMC staff, Ms. Sadie McGarvey on August 18 and 25, 2022, conditions described within the Olberding BRA accurately reflect conditions onsite with the exception of the extent of riparian habitat located on the Project site. Additional information obtained during Ms. McGarvey’s August 24, 2022 site visit included the delineation of the extent of riparian canopy within the Project site. Additional site description is provided below to supplement analysis necessary to evaluate effects to onsite habitats. An updated arborist report is included as Attachment B. 2.1 RIPARIAN The term “riparian” generally refers the transition zone between wetlands and uplands, often referring to the primarily woody vegetation associated with both lentic and lotic systems. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) defines riparian vegetation as “native vegetation occurring naturally along banks or margins of lakes or streams (CDFG 1994). The United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) further defines riparian areas as “plant communities contiguous to and affected by surface and subsurface hydrologic features of perennial or intermittent lotic and lentic water bodies (rivers, streams, lakes, or drainage ways)” that exhibit “distinctly different vegetative species than adjacent areas and/or “species similar to adjacent areas but exhibiting more vigorous or robust growth forms” (USFWS 2019). As described in Section 7.2.1 of the Olberding BRA, a significant portion of the Project site is dominated by riparian woodland associated with the site-adjacent Grayson Creek. This riparian woodland is dominated by large oak trees (Quercus agrifolia and Q. lobata), with trunks that generally occur at or above the TOB of Grayson Creek, and high canopies that shade both the creek channel and the adjacent upland areas. The lower canopy within this oak-dominated riparian woodland is comprised largely of willows (Salix spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica). Riparian trees with trunks that occur above TOB are generally located within a low terrace that occurs outside of the creek channel, but would potentially receive channel overflows during rare episodic flood events. The northernmost riparian trees, especially on the western portion of the Project site, exhibit strong phototropism - leaning outwards from the dense innermost riparian canopy seeking sufficient light to continue growth. The extent of riparian canopy was determined as the dripline of all trees with trunks occurring below TOB, or those with trunks occurring at or above top of bank which exhibit phototropic characteristics that indicate the inclusion of those trees within a riparian community that has clearly expanded beyond the resources provided within the footprint of the Grayson Creek channel and abutting uplands. The extent of the riparian woodland is depicted in Figure 3. Photos 1 and 2 within Attachment C clearly illustrate the distinction between the upright growth forms of the trees within the mixed woodland (discussed in Section 7.2.1 of the Olberding BRA) compared to the outstretched and leaning growth forms of the riparian trees that occur in close proximity. In some areas, the canopy of the riparian trees overlap with the canopy of the upland mixed woodland. In these instances, the edge of riparian canopy was mapped as the dripline of the riparian trees. A total of 1.01 acres of riparian woodland has been mapped on the Project site. 4 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 2.2 UPLAND WOODLANDS As described in Section 7.2.1 of the Olberding BRA, the majority of the Project site is comprised of upland, mixed woodland habitat dominated by valley and coast live oaks, with minor components of black walnut (Juglans hindsii), Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila), Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), as well as other ornamental and/or non-indigenous species such as mimosa (Albizia julibrissin), Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinensis), and incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens). The herbaceous layer of the upland woodland habitat is dominated by non-native grasses such as wild oat (Avena fatua), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), and is regularly disced for fire suppression. The onsite woodland habitat within the southwestern portion of the site is appreciably different than that found in the northeastern portion of the Project site. These two woodland habitats are further discussed below and depicted in Figure 3. 2.2.1 Mixed Woodland The northeastern portion of the Project site is comprised of a variety of native, non-indigenous, and non-native trees, associated with the northernmost abandoned residence and roadside plantings along Grayson Road. A total of 0.6 acre of mixed woodland occurs on the Project site. 2.2.2 Valley Oak Woodland The southwestern portion of the Project site is dominated by valley and coast live oaks, with minor components of fruit and ornamental trees located near the southernmost abandoned residence. A total of 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland occurs on the Project site. 5 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 SECTION 3. POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SPECIAL-STATUS HABITATS 3.1 APPLICABLE LAWS Aquatic resources and special status habitats are regulated by state and federal resource agencies (United States Army Corps of Engineers [USACE], California State Water Resources Control Board [SWRCB], and CDFW) and are accordingly legally protected via the federal and/or state laws in addition to CEQA. The Olberding BRA addresses local, state, and federal regulatory settings regarding impacts to special-status habitats, as well as impacts to special-status habitats on the Project site. Additional discussion of impacts to riparian habitat, wildlife corridors/nursery sites, and Sensitive Natural Communities (as defined by CDFW) is included below. 3.2 METHODOLOGY Information about aquatic resources and special-status habitats that could occur on the Project site was obtained from the following sources: • Olberding BRA • JMC Riparian Delineation (August 2022, see Section 2.1 and Figure 3) • California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) RareFind 5 (CDFW 2022) • Existing literature as cited in the text 3.3 AQUATIC RESOURCES While no seasonal wetlands occur on the Project site, the southern portion of the Project site is dominated by Grayson Creek and its associated riparian habitat. As discussed in the Olberding BRA, the Grayson Creek channel is a water of the U.S./State (WOTUS) regulated by USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Grayson Creek riparian corridor is regulated by the RWQCB pursuant to the Section 401 of the CWA and the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and CDFW pursuant to California Fish and Game Code (FGC) §§1600-1607. 3.4 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS AND NURSERY SITES The Grayson Creek corridor and its associated riparian habitat are presumed to act as a wildlife corridor and a nursery site. A wildlife corridor is a portion of land that adjoins two or more larger areas of similar natural environment, often connecting wildlife populations separated by natural or created activities, disturbances, or structures. Wildlife corridors are used for dispersal and migration of wildlife, allowing for genetic exchange, population growth, and access to larger stretches of suitable habitats, and reducing habitat fragmentation. The Olberding BRA identifies the Grayson Creek corridor as providing suitable foraging and/or dispersal habitat for California red -legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) (AWS), and western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata). A nursery site is an area where juveniles occur at higher densities, avoid predation more successfully, or grow faster there than in a different habitat (Beck et. al. 2001). The Olberding BRA identifies suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats both throughout the greater Project site as well as within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor. It is presumed that the Grayson Creek riparian habitat 6 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 would act as a wildlife nursery due to the combination of presence of suitable nesting/roosting habitat and the creek corridor’s protected nature. 3.5 SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES The CNDDB was used to query all special-status habitats with known occurrences within 3 miles of the Project site. According to the CNDDB, no Sensitive Natural Communities occur within 3 miles of the Project site. However, the valley oak and riparian woodland habitats occurring on the Project site, as described in the Olberding BRA and herein, meet the definition of a Valley Oak Woodland and Forest (Quercus lobata – Quercus agrifolia/grass) (Code 71.040.06). Valley Oak Woodland and Forest has a State Rarity rank of S3, and is further protected under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act. The collective definition of Valley oak woodland and forest provided by CNPS (CNPS 2022) includes valley oak as a dominant or co-dominant within an open to continuous tree canopy, or sparse but evenly distributed savanna-like canopy, that includes coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), blue oak (Quercus douglasii), California black oak (Quercus kelloggii), interior live oak (Quercus wislizeni), California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. As discussed within the Olberding BRA, the riparian habitat occurring onsite is within the jurisdiction of CDFW pursuant to California Fish and Game Code (FGC) §§1600-1607 which regulates activities within or affecting rivers, streams, or lakes. Riparian habitat is generally likewise identified as a sensitive natural community by CDFW. Riparian habitat occurs on the Project site and is addressed in Section 2.1. 3.6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 3.6.1 Aquatic Resources The Project design incorporates a stream setback surrounding the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by Project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring onsite [79% of the onsite riparian habitat] will be avoided), project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor. As Project implementation would result in impacts to CDFW’s FGC §§1600-1607 jurisdiction, a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement would be required. In addition, implementation of the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measures MM#2 and MM #8 which would include replacement of riparian trees removed from the Project site and installation of erosion control measures would reduce impacts to WOTUS and resources under CDFW’s FGC §§1600-1607 jurisdiction to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through avoidance and minimization of impacts to waters/habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. 3.6.2 Wildlife Corridors and Nursery Sites The Project design incorporates a stream setback surrounding the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by Project activities, Project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian wildlife corridor and nursery site. Grading activities within this wildlife corridor could result in direct 7 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 impacts to terrestrial individuals using the corridor for dispersal. Tree removal would result in loss of nesting bird and roosting bat habitat. Implementation of the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measures MM #2, MM #5, MM #6, and MM#7, and Mitigation Measures BIO-2B, BIO-3, BIO-4 (below) which require tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the Project site, preconstruction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, and installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to wildlife corridors and nursery sites to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. 3.6.3 Sensitive Natural Communities Project implementation would result in removal of approximately 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland (including 40 trees, 32 of which are native species) considered a Sensitive Natural Community and an oak woodland protected under the Oak Woodland Conservation Act. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-9A and BIO-9B below, which would include replacement of trees removed from the Project site to offset the temporal loss of biomass, canopy, and habitat diversity value of the removed trees would reduce impacts to valley oak woodland to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through compensatory mitigation for impacts to valley oak woodland. The Project design incorporates a stream setback surrounding the Grayson Creek corridor. While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by Project activities, Project implementation would require grading work within 0.21 acre of the riparian habitat located on the Project site (requiring the removal of 18 riparian trees). Implementation of the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measures MM#2 and MM #8, and Mitigation Measure BIO-2B below, which would include replacement of riparian trees removed from the Project site, installation of erosion control measures, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to riparian habitat to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through avoidance and minimization of impacts to riparian habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. 8 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 SECTION 4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES 4.1 APPLICABLE LAWS Special-status species include species considered to be rare by federal and/or state resource agencies (USFWS, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), CDFW) and/or the scientific community (CNPS) and are accordingly legally protected pursuant to the federal, state, and/or local laws described below in addition to CEQA. The Olberding BRA addresses local, state, and federal regulatory settings regarding impacts to special-status habitats, as well as impacts to special-status habitats on the Project site. Additional discussion of impacts to rare plants, nesting birds, and roosting bats is discussed below. 4.2 METHODOLOGY Information about suitability of the Project site for special-status species was obtained from the following sources: • Olberding BRA • California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) RareFind 5 (CDFW 2022) • Existing literature as cited in the text 4.3 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS The Olberding BRA identified suitable habitat for four special-status plant species on the Project site: Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), Diablo Helianthella (Helianthella castanea), Mount Diablo fairy-lantern (Calochortus pulchellus), and bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris). A single floristic survey was conducted by Olberding Environmental, Inc during the April 2021 site investigation. While this survey was conducted during the bloom period for three of these species, it does not constitute a protocol-level survey effort, which generally includes multiple surveys throughout the focal species’ bloom period. The remnants of the previous year’s Congdon’s tarplant would have been identifiable during the April 2021 survey, and accordingly, the Olberding BRA ruled out presence of this species. However, in the absence of protocol-level rare plant surveys for the remaining three species, the presence of Diablo Helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy-lantern, and bent-flowered fiddleneck cannot be ruled out. 4.4 SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE The Olberding BRA identified suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats on the Project site. The trees, shrubs, grassland areas, and existing structures throughout the Project site provide suitable nesting habitat for a variety of passerines and raptors protected pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code, Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3511. The large trees and existing structures throughout the Project site provide suitable roosting habitat for special-status bats. 4.5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 4.5.1 Special-Status Plants Project implementation would require grading within suitable habitat for special-status plants. Grading activities within this suitable habitat could result in direct impacts special-status plants. 9 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-10 below, which would include conducting rare plant surveys in advance of construction commencement, would reduce impacts to special-status plants to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through avoidance of impacts to special-status species. 4.5.2 Special-Status Wildlife Project implementation would require grading within suitable habitat for nesting birds, as well as the removal of trees and structures that provide suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3 and BIO-4 below, which would include preconstruction surveys for nesting birds and roosting bats reduce impacts to nesting birds and roosting bats to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA through avoidance of impacts to these special-status species. 10 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 SECTION 5. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN POLICIES Additional local natural resource conservation and land use policies presented within the Contra Costa General Plan are applicable to the proposed Project. Only policy measures and recommendations regarding impacts to natural resources and deemed pertinent to the proposed Project are addressed in this section. Policies regarding specific project requirements such as County implementation of the review process and specific action recommendations for local, state, or federal agencies are not addressed below. Similarly, policy measures and recommendations that are clearly referring to projects or activities that are not related to the proposed Project (e.g., development on hillsides, filling and dredging of lagoons, etc.) are not addressed below. 5.1 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE POLICIES 5.1.1 Policy 8-6 Significant trees, natural vegetation, and wildlife populations generally shall be preserved. While 97 trees would be removed from the Project site as part of Project implementation, no heritage trees occur onsite or would be removed as part of the site clearing effort. Understory plants within the onsite woodlands (both upland and riparian components) that would be impacted by the project are generally dominated by non-native grasses such as wild oat, Italian rye grass, and ripgut brome, and accordingly would not be considered natural vegetation meriting protection. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-10 below, which would include conducting rare plant surveys in advance of construction commencement, would reduce impacts to special-status plants through avoidance of impacts to special-status plant species. Implementation of the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measures MM #2, MM #5, MM #6, and MM#7, and Mitigation Measures BIO-3 and BIO-4 (below) which require tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the Project site, preconstruction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, and installation of wildlife exclusion fencing would reduce impacts to wildlife populations through avoidance and minimization of impacts to species and habitat and/or compensatory mitigation for impacts to riparian trees. 5.1.2 Policy 8-7 Important wildlife habitats which would be disturbed by major development shall be preserved, and corridors for wildlife migration between undeveloped lands shall be retained. The Project site provides suitable habitat for nesting birds, roosting bats, and dispersing reptiles and amphibians. Impacts to these species and life processes would be reduced to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA as discussed in Sections 3.6 and 4.4 above. 5.1.3 Policies 8-8, 8-9, and 8-10 Significant ecological resource areas in the County shall be identified and designated for compatible low-intensity land uses. Setback zones shall be established around the resource areas to assist in their protection. 11 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 Areas determined to contain significant ecological resources, particularly those containing endangered species, shall be maintained in their natural state and carefully regulated to the maximum legal extent. Acquisition of the most ecologically sensitive properties within the County by appropriate public agencies shall be encouraged. Any development located or proposed within significant ecological resource areas shall ensure that the resource is protected. The Project site does not occur within or near any County-designated ecologically significant resource areas. 5.1.4 Policy 8-12 Natural woodlands shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible in the course of land development. Project implementation would result in removal of approximately 1.18 acres of valley oak woodland. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-9A and BIO-9B below, which would include replacement of trees removed from the Project site would reduce impacts to valley oak woodland through compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with tree removal. 5.1.5 Policy 8-13 Existing vegetation, both native and non-native, and wildlife habitat areas shall be retained in the major open space areas sufficient for the maintenance of a healthy balance of wildlife populations. While Project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor, a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by Project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring onsite [79% of the onsite riparian habitat] will be avoided). 5.1.6 Policy 8-21 The planting of native trees and shrubs shall be encouraged in order to preserve the visual integrity of the landscape, provide habitat conditions suitable for native wildlife, and ensure that a maximum number and variety of well-adapted plants are sustained in urban areas. Implementation of the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measure MM#2, and Mitigation Measures BIO-9A and BIO-9B below, would include replacement of trees removed from the Project site with native trees of the same species, if appropriate, landscape plans would prioritize native vegetation. 5.1.7 Policy 8-23 Runoff of pollutants and siltation into marsh and wetland areas from outfalls serving nearby urban development shall be discouraged. Where permitted, development plans shall be designed in such a manner that no such pollutants and siltation will significantly adversely affect the value or function of wetlands. In addition, berms, gutters, or other structures should be required at the outer boundary of the buffer zones to divert runoff to sewer systems for transport out of the area. 12 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 The proposed Project has been designed to treat and store stormwater onsite within a detention basin, with excess waters passing into the storm drainage system within Grayson Road. Project design likewise incorporates a creek setback to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. Finally, Implementation of the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measures MM # 8 which would include installation of erosion control measures would further avoid Project impacts to Grayson Creek. No pollutants or silt is expected to enter the adjacent Grayson Creek as a result of Project implementation or the ongoing site use as a residential development. 5.2 WATER RESOURCE POLICIES 5.2.1 Policy 8-78 Where feasible, existing natural waterways shall be protected and preserved in their natural state, and channels which already are modified shall be restored. A natural waterway is defined as a waterway which can support its own environment of vegetation, fowl, fish and reptiles, and which appears natural. While Project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor, a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by Project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring onsite [79% of the onsite riparian habitat] will be avoided). 5.2.2 Policy 8-86 Existing native riparian habitat shall be preserved and enhanced by new development unless public safety concerns require removal of habitat for flood control or other public purposes. While Project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor, a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by Project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring onsite [79% of the onsite riparian habitat] will be avoided). 5.2.3 Policy 8-87 On-site water control shall be required of major new developments so that no increase in peak flows occurs relative to the site's pre-development condition, unless the Planning Agency determines that off- site measures can be employed which are equally effective in preventing adverse downstream impacts. The proposed Project has been designed to treat and store stormwater onsite within a detention basin, with excess waters passing into the storm drainage system within Grayson Road. 5.2.4 Policy 8-89 Setback areas shall be provided along natural creeks and streams in areas planned for urbanization. The setback areas shall be of a width adequate to allow maintenance and to prevent damage to adjacent structures, the natural channel and associated riparian vegetation. The setback area shall be a minimum of 100 feet; 50 feet on each side of the centerline of the creek. The proposed Project has been designed to incorporate a creek setback that includes above-ground permanent elements such as roads/driveways and structures to be constructed a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of Grayson Creek (as mapped by Debolt Civil Engineering). This setback is on 13 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 average significantly wider than that observed on the southern side of Grayson Creek in proximity to the Project site. 5.2.5 Policy 8-91 Grading, filling and construction activity near watercourses shall be conducted in such a manner as to minimize impacts from increased runoff, erosion, sedimentation, biochemical degradation, or thermal pollution. The Project design incorporates a stream setback surrounding the Grayson Creek corridor. In addition, Implementation of the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measures MM # 8 which would include installation of erosion control measures would further avoid Project impacts to Grayson Creek. No pollutants or silt is expected to enter the adjacent Grayson Creek as a result of Project implementation or the ongoing site use as a residential development. 14 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 SECTION 6. MITIGATION MEASURES Potential impacts associated with implementation of the proposed Project are addressed below. With implementation of the specific mitigation measures included within the Olberding BRA as well as those recommended below, all Project-related impacts to natural resources can be reduced to a level considered less than significant. 6.1 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 2: RIPARIAN HABITAT While a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by Project activities, Project implementation would include building residences adjacent to the riparian corridor and require grading work within 0.21 acre of the riparian habitat, and removal of riparian trees located on the Project site. In addition to the Olberding BRA Mitigation Measure MM#2, the mitigation measure presented below would reduce these impacts to a level considered less than significant pursuant to the CEQA. 6.1.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-2A (Minor Revision to Olberding BRA MM #2) All trees removed from the onsite riparian woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. A total of 18 native trees within the riparian woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees would be replaced with 54 native riparian woodland tree species including valley oak, coast live oak, California buckeye, and black walnut. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. 6.1.2 Mitigation Measure BIO-2B (Addition to Olberding BRA MM #2) Final Project plans shall include measures to reduce impacts to the riparian corridor from onsite structures and site occupation, including avoidance of bright colors and glossy and/or glare producing building finishes on structures facing the riparian corridor and directing exterior lighting downward and away from the riparian corridor. Final project plans including these specifications shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permit. 6.2 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 3: NESTING BIRDS The trees, shrubs, grassy and herbaceous vegetation, and abandoned structures onsite provide suitable nesting habitat for nesting birds and raptors protected pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code, Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3511. Project-related activities could result in take of protected birds in the form of disturbance causing nest abandonment or destruction. The mitigation measure presented below would reduce these impacts to a level considered less than significant pursuant to the CEQA. 6.2.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-3 (Minor Revision to Olberding BRA MM #3) If vegetation removal, ground disturbance, or structure removal are scheduled to commence between February 1 and September 15, a preconstruction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat on the Project site and within the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the Project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed Project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction 15 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 5 days prior to commencement of vegetation removal or ground disturbance. If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, the vegetation removal and/or ground disturbance may commence as planned. If nesting birds are observed during the survey, a non-disturbance buffer based on species, nest stage, and site conditions shall be established. This buffer shall remain in place until such a time as the young have been determined (by a qualified biologist) to have fledged. Nests shall be monitored daily by a qualified biologist during Project -related activities to determine the sufficiency of the buffer and whether it should be expanded to protect the nest based on disruptions to an individual bird’s natural nesting behaviors. If the buffer is determined to be sufficient, monitoring shall be reduced to twice a week until fledging occurs. Nesting bird surveys shall be repeated if there is a lapse in Project activities of seven days or more. 6.3 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 4: ROOSTING BATS The large trees and existing structures throughout the Project site provide suitable roosting habitat for special-status bats. Project-related activities could result in take of protected bats in the form of disturbance causing maternal roost abandonment or destruction. The mitigation measure presented below would reduce these impacts to a level considered less than significant pursuant to the CEQA. 6.3.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-4 (Replacement of Olberding BRA MM #4) For all Project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of Project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special-status bat species are detected prior to the start of Project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all Project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: • To ensure that special-status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. • Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are 16 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. • If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artificial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure 6.4 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 9: VALLEY OAK WOODLAND Valley oak woodland, a Sensitive Natural Community, dominates the southwestern portion of the Project site. As such, implementation of the Project has the potential to result in adverse impacts on Sensitive Natural Communities. The following mitigation measure would reduce these impacts to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA. 6.4.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-9A All trees removed from the onsite valley oak woodland shall be replaced in-kind and onsite at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. This replacement ratio is consistent with the Draft Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance of Contra Costa County Update (Chapter 816-6, Article 816-6.802) (Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, 2021). A total of 32 native and 8 non-native trees within the valley oak woodland community are scheduled for removal – these trees shall be replaced, onsite, with 104 native valley oak woodland tree species such as valley oak, coast live oak, blue oak, California black oak, interior live oak, California buckeye, and/or California bay laurel. Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. Trees planted shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits. All installed plant material shall meet the American Nurseryman’s Association Standards. Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. A replacement tree planting plan shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. 6.4.2 Mitigation Measure BIO-9B Vegetation planted within onsite undeveloped areas shall be comprised of native valley oak woodland species. Landscape plans shall prioritize native vegetation and shall be approved by the County prior to issuance of building permits. 6.5 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 10: SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS While no special-status plant species were observed on the Project site during the 2021 and 2022 site investigations, protocol-level rare plant surveys have not been completed on the Project site. In the absence of protocol-level rare plant surveys on the Project site, the proposed Project may result 17 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 in adverse impacts to special-status plants. The following mitigation measure would reduce these impacts to a level considered less than significant pursuant to CEQA. 6.5.1 Mitigation Measure BIO-10 In the Spring immediately prior to Project implementation, protocol-level rare plant surveys shall be conducted on the Project site. Rare plant surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist, in accordance with all applicable survey guidelines including those published by USFWS (USFWS 1996), CDFW (CDFW 2018) and CNPS (CNPS 2001). If determined to be necessary by the qualified botanist, reference site surveys shall be conducted to confirm plant phenology (flowering periods). If state or federally listed plants are observed onsite during protocol-level rare plant surveys, all compensatory mitigation requirements and additional avoidance and minimization measures identified by CDFW and/or USFWS shall be implemented. If CNPS-Ranked species are observed onsite during protocol-level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. 18 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 SECTION 7. REFERENCES Beck, M.W., K.L. Heck, K.W. Able, D.L. Childers, D.B. Eggleston, B.M. Gillanders, B. Halpern, C.G. Hays, K. Hoshino, T.J. Minello, R.J. Orth, P.F. Sheridan, M.P. Weinstein. 2001. The Identification, Conservation, and Management of Estuarine and Marine Nurseries for Fish and Invertebrates: A better understanding of the habitats that serve as nurseries for marine species and the factors that create site-specific variability in nursery quality will improve conservation and management of these areas. BioScience, Volume 51, Issue 8, August 2001, Pages 633–641, https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[0633:TICAMO]2.0.CO;2 CDFG (California Department of Fish and Game). 1994. A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements Sections 1600-1607 California Fish and Game Code. 226 pps. CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. The Resources Agency, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Sacramento, CA. CDFW. 2022. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) – Commercial versions dated August 2 and November 1, 2022. https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2001. CNPS Botanical Survey Guidelines. Online. http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/pdf/cnps_survey_guidelines.pdf (accessed February 2022) CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2022. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. Accessed on December 14, 2022. Available at https://vegetation.cnps.org USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 1996. Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed and Candidate Plants. Prepared September 23, 1996. Endangered Species Information. INTERNET (http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/Survey-Protocols-Guidelines/es_survey.htm USFWS. 2019. A System for Mapping Riparian Areas in The Western United States. 36 pp. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 FIGURES Figure 1. Site and Vicinity Map Figure 2. Project Components Map Figure 3. Habitat Map Project Site Legend 103 105 106 109 110107 111 113 123 104 124 153 125 126 128 129 127 133 132 131 151 150 152 156 158 164 165 166 147 148 149 146 145 143 144 141 142 140 139 136 135114115 116 130 175 176 177 178 180 184 187 188 193194 195174 168 169 170 167 171 171B 108 112 131 LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 307309 311 310 308 312313 305 306 304 303 302 301 RevisionsNo.Drawing Number: OF CALIFORNIAScale No. 61148 EXP. 12/31/22 VIC LI Stamp: Date Job No.IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR1024 GRAYSON ROAD (SUBD SD20-9531)PLEASANT HILL (UNINC.)CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 11/28/22 19300 1LOTTING EXHIBIT 1" = 20' EX 1 G R A Y S O N R O A DFigure 2. Project Component Map Project Site (3.05 acres) Grading Impact Area (2.13 acres) Legend Land Cover Types Developed - 0.21 acre onsite 0.20 acre impacted Mixed -0.65 acre on- and off-site Woodland 0.62 acre impacted Valley Oak - 1.18 acres onsite Woodland 1.10 acres impacted Riparian - 1.01 acres onsite Woodland 0.21 acre impacted Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A. Biological Resources Analysis Report for the Grayson Road Property (prepared by Olberding Environmental, Inc dated February 2022) Attachment B. Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road (prepared by Traverso Tree Service) Attachment C. Representative Site Photos Depicting Riparian and Upland Woodlands Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 ATTACHMENT A Biological Resources Analysis Report for the Grayson Road Property (prepared by Olberding Environmental, Inc dated February 2022) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE GRAYSON ROAD PROPERTY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Calibr Ventures 1908 Cambridge Place Walnut Creek, CA 94598 Prepared by: OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Wetland Regulatory Consultants 3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260 San Ramon, California 94583 Phone: (925) 866-2111 ~ Fax: (925) 866-2126 E-mail: jeff@olberdingenv.com Contact: Jeff Olberding February 2022 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 LOCATION .......................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION............................................................................................... 4 4.0 REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................................. 5 4.1 Federal Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................... 5 4.1.1 Plants and Wildlife ............................................................................................ 5 4.1.2 Wetlands/Waters ............................................................................................... 7 4.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ................................................................................ 8 4.1.4 Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ................................................ 9 4.2 State Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Plants and Wildlife ............................................................................................ 9 4.2.2 Wetlands/Waters ............................................................................................. 10 4.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act ............................................................ 11 4.2.4 Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance – Chapter 816-6 - Tree Protection And Preservation Ordinance ................................................................................... 11 4.2.5 Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance – Chapter 914 – Rights-of- Ways and Setbacks ......................................................................................... 13 5.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................ 14 5.1 Soils Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 16 5.2 Plant Survey Methods ........................................................................................................ 16 5.2.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources .......................................................... 16 5.2.2 Field Surveys .................................................................................................. 17 5.3 Wildlife Survey Methods ................................................................................................... 17 5.3.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources .......................................................... 17 5.3.2 Field Surveys .................................................................................................. 17 6.0 RESULTS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................. 18 6.1 Soil Evaluation Results ...................................................................................................... 18 6.2 Plant Survey Results ........................................................................................................... 20 6.2.1 Floristic Inventory and Habitat Characterization ............................................ 20 6.3 Wildlife Survey Results ...................................................................................................... 24 6.3.1 General Wildlife Species and Habitats ........................................................... 24 7.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 34 7.1 Wetlands/Waters ................................................................................................................ 34 7.2 Special-status Plants ........................................................................................................... 35 7.3 Special-status Wildlife ....................................................................................................... 35 8.0 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................. 36 9.0 LITERATURE CITED ....................................................................................................... 41 iii LIST OF ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Map Figure 2 Vicinity Map Figure 3 USGS Topographic Map Figure 4 Aerial Map Figure 5 CNDDB Wildlife Occurrences within 5 miles Figure 6 CNDDB Plant Occurrences within 5 miles Figure 7 USFWS Critical Habitat Figure 8 Soils Map Figure 9 Photo Location Map Figure 10 Habitat Map Figure 11 Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank ATTACHMENT 2 SITE PLANS ATTACHMENT 3 TABLES Table 1 Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Table 2 Special-Status Species Occurring Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area ATTACHMENT 4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS This report should be cited as: Olberding Environmental, Inc. February 2022. Biological Resources Analysis Report for the Grayson Road Property, Contra Costa County, California. Prepared for Calibr Ventures. 1 SUMMARY On April 6, 2021, Olberding Environmental, Inc. conducted a field reconnaissance survey of the Grayson Road Property (Property) for the purpose of identifying sensitive plant and wildlife species and sensitive habitats potentially occurring on the Property. The Property surveyed is comprised of approximately 3.05 acres located in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California (Attachment 1, Figures 1-2). Results of the initial reconnaissance survey indicate that the Property contains waters that might be considered jurisdictional by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The southern boundary of the Property is bordered by Grayson Creek, a perennial creek that flows northeast from its origin in Briones Regional Park. The creek flows through a riparian woodland corridor located on the southern portion of the Property. Water was present in the entire length of Grayson Creek bordering the Property during the April 2021 survey. The Project as proposed does not include any improvements within Grayson Creek, and the residential development will be set back from the creek in accordance with the Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance (Title 9, Chapter 914). A query of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) showed that four special-status plant species have a potential to occur on the Property. Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), Diablo helianthella (Helianthella castanea), Mount Diablo fairy-lantern (Calochortus pulchellus), and bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris) were identified as having a potential to occur on the Property based on the presence of suitable habitat for these species and CNDDB occurrences located within the vicinity of the Property. The April 2021 survey of the Property performed during the blooming period for three of these species (Diablo helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy lantern, bent-flowered fiddleneck) did not find any of these species present on the Property and they are presumed absent from the Property. Although the April 2021 survey was performed outside of the identified blooming period for Congdon’s tarplant (June-November), remnant plants would have been observed if they were present. For these reasons Congdon’s tarplant is presumed absent from the Property. A total of five bird species were identified to have a moderate to high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting or foraging capacity. The red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) all have a high potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. The sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) and American kestrel (Falco sparverius) have a moderate potential to occur in a nesting and foraging capacity. Three of the birds listed above (red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, Cooper’s hawk) were present, and observed foraging on the Property. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed 2 on the Property exhibiting nesting behaviors. Mitigation measures, including preconstruction surveys for nesting passerine birds and raptors prior to performing any construction-related activities such as tree and vegetation removal or grading during the avian nesting season (February through August), will reduce the potential impacts to sensitive bird species to less-than-significant. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (CRLF) in the 5-mile radius of the Property. Water was present in Grayson creek during the April 2021 survey which offers suitable habitat for foraging and aquatic dispersal within the creek channel. Various vegetative debris located throughout the riparian corridor habitat provide suitable upland refuge. USFWS designated CRLF critical habitat is located approximately 1.3 miles west of the Property. For these reasons, CRLF has a moderate potential to occur on the Property within the creek channel and riparian habitat in a foraging and dispersal capacity, and the proposed project may have a potentially significant impact on CRLF. However, with the proposed mitigation measures, the project will reduce any potential impacts to less-than-significant. CNDDB listed four occurrences of California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) (CTS) within five miles of the Property. However, all of these occurrences are historical and the species is considered to be extirpated within this area. The Property lacks vernal pools or ponds required for breeding, and is not within dispersal distance of any known or potential breeding habitat. For these reasons, CTS is presumed absent from the Property and the proposed project will not result in any potentially significant impacts to the species. CNDDB listed 13 occurrences of Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) within the 5-mile radius of the Property. Due to the sensitivity of these species, the exact locations of these occurrences are unknown. The Property does not support shrub or rocky outcrop habitat that the whipsnake prefers; thus, making it unlikely that the whipsnake would breed or permanently reside within the Property boundaries. Suitable whipsnake habitat is, however, located within USFWS designated critical habitat for Alameda Whipsnake approximately 0.9 west in Briones Regional Park and the surrounding open space. Although the Property is surrounded by residential development, this would not preclude whipsnake from dispersing through the Property, as areas of open space are also present within the vicinity of the Property. Therefore, Alameda whipsnake could disperse through the Property as it moves to more suitable habitat. For these reasons, there is potential for Alameda whipsnake to occur on the Property, albeit low, in a dispersal capacity only. The mitigation measures presented in section 8.0 will reduce any potential impacts to this species to less-than-significant. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) within the 5-mile radius of the Property. Water was present in Grayson Creek during the April 2021 survey. Therefore, western pond turtle could use the creek channel for foraging and aquatic dispersal and 3 the riparian corridor for terrestrial dispersal. For these reasons, western pond turtle has a moderate potential to occur in the creek channel and riparian habitat in a dispersal capacity only, and the proposed project may have a potentially significant impact on western pond turtle. However, with the proposed mitigation measures, the project will reduce any potential impacts to less-than- significant. No sign of bat use was observed on the Property during the April 2021 survey; however, based on habitat suitability, it was determined that bats have a moderate potential to utilize the developed, mixed woodland, and riparian woodland habitats located within the site in a roosting and foraging capacity. These bat species include: Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis). Mitigation measures, including a preconstruction survey for bats in areas with suitable habitat prior to performing any construction- related activities or timing construction to minimize impacts to bats, will reduce the potential impacts to bat species to less-than-significant. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Olberding Environmental, Inc. prepared this biological resources analysis of the proposed Grayson Road project, located in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California (Figure 1). The purpose of this analysis is to provide a description of existing biological resources on the Property and to identify potentially significant impacts that could occur to sensitive biological resources from the proposed residential development of the Property. Biological resources include common plant and animal species, and special-status plants and animals as designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Biological resources also include “waters of the United States” and “waters of the State”, as regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and California State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB). This analysis included a review of pertinent literature on relevant background information and habitat characteristics of the site. Our review included researching existing information in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) maintained by the CDFW and the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Also included was a review of information related to species of plants and animals that could potentially utilize the described habitats identified on and immediately surrounding the Property. To assist in the assessment, a field reconnaissance investigation of the Property was conducted on April 6, 2021. This report documents the methods, results, and conclusions for the reconnaissance-level survey associated with the biological resources analysis for the Property, and identifies “potentially 4 significant” and “significant impacts” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that could occur to biological resources. Mitigation measures have been developed for all identified significant or potentially significant impacts, and upon implementation would reduce the effects of such impacts to levels regarded as “less than significant” pursuant to CEQA. 2.0 LOCATION The Property is located approximately 3.4 miles north of CA-24 and approximately 2.0 miles west of I-680, on Grayson Road just outside the city limits of Pleasant Hill in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California. Attachment 1, Figure 1 depicts the regional location of the Property in Contra Costa County, and Attachment 1, Figure 2 illustrates the vicinity of the Property in relationship to the City of Pleasant Hill. Attachment 1, Figure 3 identifies the location of the Property on the USGS 7.5 Quadrangle Map for Walnut Creek. An aerial photograph of the Property has been included as Attachment 1, Figure 4. 3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND SETTING The Property encompasses approximately 3.05 acres in an irregular shape and supports four habitat types; mixed woodland, perennial creek, riparian woodland and developed (Attachment 1, Figure 10). Characteristic vegetation of these habitats includes wild oat (Avena fatua), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), buckeye (Aesculus californica) and California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica) trees. The Property has two existing residential structures on site which are surrounded by ornamental and fruit trees including but not limited to black walnut (Juglans nigra) and Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila). Coast live oak trees are also present around the residential homes. The two-story residence is located in the northern portion of the site, while a one-story house is located in the center of the Property. Grayson Creek, a perennial creek flows along the southern boundary of the Property from west to east through a riparian corridor. The topography of the Property consists of relatively flat landscape that slightly slopes from west to east. Elevations of the Property range between 160 feet above sea level near the northeastern boundary and 188 feet above sea level along western boundary. The Property is immediately surrounded by residential development to the north, south, east, and west. Grayson Road exists along the northern boundary of the Property. Briones Regional Park 5 lies approximately 0.9 miles south and west of the Property. Oakmont Memorial Park exists approximately 0.4 miles west of the Property. Dinosaur Hill Park exists approximately 1 mile south of the Property. Grayson Woods Golf Course lies just northwest of the Property on the north side of Grayson Road. 4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project is a 10-unit housing development on the approximately 3.05 acre Property as shown on Attachment 2. The project includes a new access road across the site that would provide access to all lots. A stormwater detention basin will be constructed in the northeast portion of the project site. Treated stormwater will be discharged from the basin into a Contra Costa County maintained stormwater drainage system that currently exists under Grayson Road. Infrastructure utilities (water, sewer, cable, electrical, etc.) will also be installed for the residential units. Construction of the proposed project would remove 84 trees. The proposed project plans do not anticipate placing any development or infrastructure in Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor. A riparian setback between the projects grading limits and Grayson Creek will be set and adhered to as shown on Attachment 2. 5.0 REGULATORY SETTING This section provides a discussion of laws and regulations that regulate native wildlife, fish, plants and aquatic resources. 5.1 Federal Regulatory Setting 5.1.1 Plants and Wildlife The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq., as amended) regulates native plant and animal species, and the listed as Threatened or Endangered under the ESA and designated “critical habitat” for listed species. Listed species are taxa for which proposed and final rules have been published in the Federal Register (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2020). Federal Proposed species (USFWS, 2019) are species for which a proposed listing as Threatened or Endangered under ESA has been published in the Federal Register. Federal Candidate species are defined as “those taxa for which we have on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded by other higher priority listing actions” (USFWS, 2019). Federal Candidate species are not afforded formal protection, although USFWS encourages other federal agencies to give consideration to Candidate species in environmental planning. The pertinent sections of the ESA are: 6 Section 4 (16 USCA §1533): Species listing, Critical Habitat Designation, and Recovery Planning: outlines the procedure for listing endangered plants and wildlife. Section 7 (§1536): Federal Consultation Requirement: imposes limits on the actions of federal agencies that might impact listed species. Section 9 (§1538): Prohibition on Take: prohibits the "taking" of a listed species by anyone, including private individuals, and State and local agencies. Section 10: Exceptions to the Take Prohibition: non-federal agencies can obtain an incidental take permit in connection with the approval of a habitat conservation plan (HCP). The NMFS has jurisdiction over listed marine mammals and anadromous fish, and the USFWS implements the ESA for listed terrestrial species and no anadromous fish species. Below, Sections 9, 7, and 10 of ESA are discussed. Section 9 of ESA as amended, prohibits the “take” of any fish or wildlife species listed under the ESA as endangered. Under federal regulation, “take” of fish or wildlife species listed by the USFWS prior to 2020, or through a special “Section 4(d)” finding for species listed since 2020 or by NMFS as threatened is also prohibited unless otherwise authorized. “Take,” as defined by the ESA, means “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” “Harm” is further defined to include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering" (50 CFR 17.3). A December 2001 decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal in Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association ruled that the USFWS must show that a threatened or endangered species is present on a site and that it would be taken by the project activities. If “take” of a listed species may occur during the course of an otherwise lawful activity, the USFWS and NMFS may authorize take through a Section 7 consultation as discussed further below (for federal actions or private actions that are permitted or funded by a federal agency such as the Corps), or through Section 10 of ESA which requires preparation of a HCP (for state and local agencies, or individuals, and projects without a federal “nexus”; for example, projects that do not need a Corps permit). Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each federal agency consult with the USFWS or NMFS to ensure that any action authorized, funded or carried out by such agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for listed species. The Section 7 consultation process is triggered by a 7 determination made by the federal “action agency” – that is, the federal agency that is carrying out, funding, or approving a project - that the federal action and any interrelated or interdependent actions “may affect” a listed species or designated critical habitat. If an action is likely to adversely affect a listed species or designated critical habitat, formal consultation between the nexus agency and the USFWS/NMFS is required, and the USFWS/NMFS will issue a formal biological opinion assessing whether the proposed action is likely to result in “jeopardy” to a listed species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. If the USFWS/NMFS concludes that a proposed project would not jeopardize a listed species or result in adverse modification of critical habitat, the agency will issue an incidental take statement that allows incidental take of federally listed species. For non-federal entities, for example private parties, cities, counties whose activity does not have a federal nexus (such as a Corps permit) Section 10 provides the mechanism for obtaining take authorization. Under Section 10, a non-federal applicant may obtain an “incidental take permit” from the USFWS or NMFS by preparing an HCP that specifies the impacts that are likely to result to federally-listed species, and the measures the applicant will undertake to minimize and mitigate such impacts, and the funding that will be available to implement those steps. 5.1.2 Wetlands/Waters The federal government, acting through the Corps and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has jurisdiction over all “waters of the United States” as authorized by §404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and §10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 CFR Parts 320-330). Activities that cause the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States require permitting by the Corps. Actions affecting small areas of jurisdictional waters of the United States may qualify for a Nationwide Permit (NWP), provided conditions of the permit are met, such as avoiding impacts to threatened or endangered species or to important cultural sites. Discharges that affect larger areas or which do not meet the conditions of an NWP require an Individual Permit. The process for obtaining an Individual Permit requires a detailed alternatives analysis and development of a comprehensive mitigation/monitoring plan. Waters of the United States are defined as territorial seas and traditionally navigable waters, tributaries, lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters, and adjacent wetlands. Under federal regulation, wetlands are defined as areas that are inundated or saturated by surface of groundwater at a frequency or duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. (33 CFR Part 328.3(c)(16)). Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. In addition, portions of the riparian habitat along a river or stream may be a wetland 8 where the riparian vegetation is at or below the ordinary high water mark and thus also meets the wetland hydrology and hydric soil criteria. Navigable waters include all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tides, including the open ocean, tidal bays, and tidal sloughs. Navigable waters also include some large, non-tidal rivers and lakes, which are important for transportation in commerce. The jurisdictional limit over navigable waters extends laterally to the entire water surface and bed of the waterbody landward to the limits of the mean high tide line. For non-tidal rivers or lakes, which have been designated (by the Corps) to be navigable waters, the limit of jurisdiction along the shoreline is defined by the ordinary high water mark. “Other waters” refer to waters of the United States other than wetlands or navigable waters. Other waters include streams and ponds, which are generally open water bodies and are not vegetated. Other waters can be perennial or intermittent water bodies and waterways. The Corps regulates other waters to the outward limit of the ordinary high water mark. Streams should exhibit a defined channel, bed and banks to be delineated as other waters. The Corps does not generally consider “non-tidal drainage and irrigation ditches excavated on dry land” to be jurisdictional waters of the United States (and such ditches would therefore not be regulated by the Corps (33 CFR Parts 320-330, November 13, 1986). Other areas generally not considered jurisdictional waters include: 1) artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland habitat if the irrigation ceased; 2) artificial lakes and ponds created by excavating and/or diking of dry land to collect and retain water, used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing; 3) waste treatment ponds; 4) ponds formed by construction activities including borrow pits until abandoned; and 5) ponds created for aesthetic reasons such as reflecting or ornamental ponds (33 CFR Part 328.3). However, the preamble also states “the Corps reserves the right on a case-by-case basis to determine that a particular waterbody within these categories” can be regulated as jurisdictional water. The EPA also has authority to determine jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on a case-by-case basis. Riparian habitat that is above the ordinary high water mark and does not meet the three-parameter criteria for a wetland would not be regulated as jurisdictional waters of the United States. 5.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act Raptors are migratory bird species protected by international treaty under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-711). The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed in 50 CFR. Part 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). 9 5.1.4 Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Enacted in 1940, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) provides protection for the bald and golden eagle by “prohibiting the take, possession, sale, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, of any bald or golden eagle, alive or dead, including any part, nest, or egg, unless allowed by permit” (16 U.S.C. 668(a); 50 CFR 22). The BGEPA defines the term “take” to include “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb” if the action is done “knowingly, or with wanton disregard for the consequences” of the action (16 USC 668a,c; 50 CFR 22.3). “Disturb” is defined in 50 CFR 22.3 regulations as “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available: (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.” 5.2 State Regulatory Setting 5.2.1 Plants and Wildlife In 1984, California enacted the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish and Game Code §2050). The basic policy of CESA is to conserve and enhance endangered species and their habitats, and prohibits the unauthorized “take” of CESA listed species and candidates for listing under CESA. The California Code of Regulations (Title 14, §670.5) lists animal species listed as endangered or threatened under CESA. “Take” is defined by Section 86 of the California Fish and Game Code and means “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” Because take under CESA does not include “harm” (see discussion of ESA, above), only activities that would result in the direct take of a CESA-listed species, (e.g., species mortality) is subject to CESA. If an activity will result in take of a state-listed species or state candidate species incidental to an otherwise lawful activity, CDFW may issue an “incidental take” permit pursuant to §2081 of the Fish and Game Code. The CDFW may not issue an incidental take permit for species that are “fully protected” under the fish and game code. These include species protected by the state prior to enacting CESA. See California Fish and Game Code §§ 3505, 3511, 4700, 5050, 5515, and 5517. The CDFW also maintains a list of animal species of special concern (CDFW 2021), most of which are species whose breeding populations in California may face extirpation. Although these species have no legal status, the CDFW recommends considering them during analysis of proposed 10 property impacts to protect declining populations and avoid the need to list them as endangered in the future. Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs. Implementation of the take provisions requires that Property-related disturbance at active nesting territories be reduced or eliminated during critical phases of the nesting cycle (generally February 1 – September 1, annually). Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (e.g., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) or the loss of habitat upon which the birds depend, is considered “taking” and is potentially punishable by fines and/or imprisonment. Such taking would also violate federal law protecting migratory birds (e.g., MBTA). 5.2.2 Wetlands/Waters The SWRCB and RWQCBs regulate the discharge of pollutants to wetlands and other waters through §401 of the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Section 401 requires a state water quality certification of permits issued by federal agencies, such as the Corps. Water quality certifications require the SWRCB or applicable RWQCB to find that the activities permitted by the federal permit will not violate state water quality standards individually or cumulatively over the term of the permit, and that the federal permit will not (the term is typically for five years). The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, Water Code § 13260, requires that any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, that could affect the waters of the State to file a report of discharge with the SWRCB or applicable RWQCB through an application for waste discharge (Water Code Section 13260(a)(1). The term “waters of the State” is defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State (Water Code §13050(e)), and may include “isolated wetlands,” or those wetlands considered to be outside of the Corps’ jurisdiction. Placing fill material into a water of the State generally constitutes “pollution”. Pollution is defined as an alteration of the quality of the waters of the state by waste that unreasonably affects its beneficial uses (Water Code §13050(1)). California Fish and Game Code §§1600-1607 require the CDFW be notified of any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake. Upon notification, the CDFW may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The CDFW defines a stream as follows: 11 “... a body of water that flows at least periodically...through a bed or channel having banks and supporting fish and other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.” (Source: Streambed Alteration Program, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2016). In practice, CDFW authority is extended to any “blue line” stream shown on a USGS topographic map, as well as unmapped channels with a definable bank and bed. Wetlands, as defined by the Corps, need not be present for CDFW to exert authority. 5.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act According to Appendix G of the CEQA (CEQA 2021) Guidelines, a proposed project would have a significant impact on biological resources if it would: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW and USFWS? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on 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? d) Interfere substantially with the movement 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? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 5.2.4 Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance – Chapter 816-6 - Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance 12 According to the Contra Costa County tree ordinance, a “protected tree” is defined as the following: (1) On all properties within the unincorporated area of the county: (A) Where the tree to be cut down, destroyed or trimmed by topping is adjacent to or part of a riparian, foothill woodland or oak savanna area, or part of a stand of four or more trees, measures twenty inches or larger in circumference (approximately 6.5 inches in diameter) as measured four and one-half feet from ground level, and is included in the following list of indigenous trees: Acer macrophyllum (Bigleaf Maple), Acer negundo (Box Elder), Aesculus californica (California Buckeye), Alnus Rhombifolia (White Alder), Arbutus menziesii (Madrone), Heteromeles arbutifolia (Toyon), Juglans Hindsii (California Black Walnut), Juniperus californica (California Juniper), Lithocarpus densiflora (Tanoak or Tanbark Oak), Pinus attenuata (Knobcone Pine), Pinus sabiniana (Digger Pine), Platanus Racemosa (California Sycamore), Populus fremontii (Fremont Cottonwood), Populus trichocarpa (Black Cottonwood), Quercus agrifolia (California or Coast Live Oak), Quercus chrysolepis (Canyon Live Oak), Quercus douglasii (Blue Oak), Quercus kelloggii (California Black Oak), Quercus lobata (Valley Oak), Quercus wislizenii (Interior Live Oak), Salix lasiandra (Yellow Willow), Salix laevigata (Red Willow), Salix lasiolepis (Arroyo Willow), Sambucus callicarpa (Coast Red Elderberry), Sequoia sempervirens (Coast Redwood), Umbellularia californica (California Bay or Laurel); (B) Any tree shown to be preserved on an approved tentative map, development or site plan or required to be retained as a condition of approval; (C) Any tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree. (2) On any of the properties specified in subsection (3) of this section: (A) Any tree measuring twenty inches or larger in circumference (approximately six and one-half inches diameter), measured four and one-half feet from ground level including the oak trees listed above; (B) Any multistemmed tree with the sum of the circumferences measuring forty inches or larger, measured four and one-half feet from ground level; (C) And any significant grouping of trees, including groves of four or more trees. (3) Specified properties referred to in subsection (2) of this section includes: 13 (A) Any developed property within any commercial, professional office or industrial district; (B) Any undeveloped property within any district; (C) Any area designated on the general plan for recreational purposes or open space; (D) Any area designated in the county general plan open space element as visually significant riparian or ridge line vegetation and where the tree is adjacent to or part of a riparian, foothill woodland or oak savanna area. (Ords. 94-59, 94-22). Any person proposing to trench, grade or fill within the dripline of any protected tree or cut down, destroy, trim by topping or remove any protected tree shall apply to the department for a tree permit, not less than ten days prior to the proposed tree removal or tree alterations. Persons who would be eligible to apply for three or more individual tree permits under provisions of this chapter may apply for a collective tree permit for the site. (Ords. 94-59, 94-22). If the reasons for alteration or removal relate to the health of the tree or if grading, trenching or filling is proposed under the dripline of an existing tree, or the review is of a collective tree permit and the director determines that more technical expertise is necessary to make the decision, a report prepared by an arborist may be required, to be paid for by the applicant. (Ords. 94-59, 94-22). 5.2.5 Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance – Chapter 914 – Rights-of-Ways and Setbacks No permanent structures of any kind may be built within the structure setback area. Creek structure setback requirements are outlined in Title 9, Division 914, (Sections 914-14.010, .012, .014) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code and are described as follows: No permanent structures of any kind other than drainage structures may be constructed within or over any easement described in this chapter. Encroachments such as filled slopes, retaining walls, fencing and landscaping shall not be permitted. Public utilities may be installed within easements upon approval by the public works department. (Ords. 89-28, 8540 § 4, 78-5). (a) "Structure setback line" means the line separating the structure setback area from the remainder of the lot. For unimproved earth channels within the subdivision, a structure setback line shall be shown on the final map or parcel map as follows: The thread of the channel shall be shown as accurately as possible, and a dashed line shall indicate the appropriate setback with a note describing the method used to determine the top of bank, selected from those set forth herein. The development rights for that portion of the lot on the creek side of the setback line, which is defined 14 as the "structure setback area," shall be offered for dedication to Contra Costa County by separate instrument. (b) "Top of bank" means the point where the water surface plus sufficient freeboard for the design average recurrence interval runoff intersects the existing ground, or the point where a line with a slope of 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical extending from the toe of the channel intersects the existing ground, whichever point is the greatest vertical distance above the channel invert. A separate top of bank shall be determined for each side of the channel. (c) The structure setback line for unimproved channels shall be determined by measuring the following horizontal distance away from the top of bank on each side of the watercourse: Height of top of bank above channel invert Horizontal distance between top of bank and setback line less than 20' 30' 20' - 29.99' 35' 30' - 39.99' 40' 40' - 49.99' 45' 50' and greater 50' (d) Where significant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required above, the advisory agency may extend the setback line to include such areas. (Chapter 914-14, Ords. 89-28, 85-40 § 6, 78-5, Contra Costa County Code). 6.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES A special-status plant and wildlife species database search and review was conducted using the CNDDB and other sources. An additional search was conducted for special-status plants using CNPS Inventory on-line. Special-status species reports were accessed by searching the CNDDB database for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles which surround the Property, and by examining those species that have been identified in the vicinity of the Property. These quadrangles will be henceforth noted as surrounding quads. The database report identified special- status species known to occur in the region or those that have the potential to occur in the vicinity 15 of the Property. The CNDDB report was used to focus special-status species analysis of the site prior to the reconnaissance surveys. An Olberding Environmental biologist conducted a reconnaissance-level survey of the Property on April 6, 2021. The survey consisted of walking throughout the Property and evaluating the site and adjacent lands for potential biological resources. Existing conditions observed plants and wildlife, adjacent land use, soils and potential biological resources were recorded during the visit. Plant and wildlife species observed within and adjacent to the Property during the reconnaissance survey are listed in Attachment 2, Table 1. Site photographs are provided in Attachment 3 of this document. Attachment 1, Figure 9 shows where each site photo was taken. The objectives of the field survey were to determine the potential presence or absence of special- status species habitat listed in the CNDDB database report and to identify any wetland areas that could be potentially regulated by the Corps, RWQCB, and/or CDFW (CNDDB 2021). In addition, the Olberding Environmental biologist looked for other potential sensitive species or habitats that may not have been obvious from background database reports or research. Surveys conducted after the growing season or conducted outside of the specific flowering period for a special-status plant cannot conclusively determine the presence or absence of such plant species; therefore, site conditions and habitat type were used to determine potential for occurrence. When suitable habitat was observed to support a special-status plant or animal species, it was noted in the discussion for that particular species. Regulatory agencies evaluate the possibility of occurrence based on habitats observed on-site and the degree of connectivity with other special-status animal habitats in the vicinity of the Property. These factors are discussed in each special-status plant or animal section. This report also identifies the potential impacts to species that would be defined as endangered or rare pursuant to Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines. Additionally, this report identifies potential impacts to sensitive biological resources and provides mitigation recommendations to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Potential for occurrence of each special-status or protected plant and animal species was evaluated using the following criteria. • Present: The species has been recorded by CNDDB or other literature as occurring on the Property and/or was observed on the Property during the reconnaissance survey or protocol surveys. • May Occur: The species has been recorded by CNDDB or other literature as occurring within five miles of the Property, and/or was observed within five miles of the Property, and/or suitable habitat for the species is present on the Property or its immediate vicinity. • Not Likely to Occur: The species has historically occurred on or within five miles of the Property but has no current records. The species occurs within five miles of the Property 16 but only marginally suitable habitat conditions are present. The Property is likely to be used only as incidental foraging habitat or as an occasional migratory corridor. • Presumed Absent: The species will not occur on the Property due to the absence of suitable habitat conditions, and/or the lack of current occurrences. Alternatively, if directed or protocol-level surveys were done during the proper occurrence period and the species was not found, it is presumed absent. Sources consulted for agency status information include USFWS (2020) for federally listed species and CDFW (2021) for State of California listed species. Based on information from the above sources, Olberding Environmental developed a target list of special-status plants and animals with the potential to occur within or in the vicinity of the Property (Attachment 2, Table 2). 6.1 Soils Evaluation The soils present on a property may determine if habitat on the site is suitable for certain special- status plants and animals. The host plants of some special-status invertebrates may also require specific soil conditions. In the absence of suitable soil conditions, special-status plants or animals requiring those conditions would be presumed absent. Information regarding soil characteristics for the Property was obtained by viewing the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey report for the Property (NRCS 2019). 6.2 Plant Survey Methods The purposes of the botanical surveys were (1) to characterize the habitat types (plant communities) of the study area; (2) to determine whether any suitable habitat for any special-status plant species occurs within the study area; and (3) to determine whether any sensitive habitat types (wetlands) occur within the study area. Site conditions and plant habitat surveys are important tools in determining the potential occurrence of plants not recorded during surveys (e.g., special- status plants) because presence cannot conclusively be determined if field surveys are conducted after the growing season or conducted outside a specific flowering period. 6.2.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources The biologist conducted focused surveys of literature and special-status species databases in order to identify special-status plant species and sensitive habitat types with potential to occur in the study area. Sources reviewed included the CNDDB occurrence records (CNDDB 2021) and CNPS Inventory (Skinner and Pavlik 1994) for the surrounding quads; and standard flora (The Jepson 17 Manual 2012). From the above sources, a list of special-status plant species with potential to occur in the Property vicinity was developed (Attachment 2, Table 2). 6.2.2 Field Surveys A biologist from Olberding Environmental conducted a reconnaissance-level survey to determine habitat types and the potential for special-status plants based on the observed habitat types. All vascular plant species that were identifiable at the time of the survey were recorded and identified using keys and descriptions in The Jepson Manual (2012). The habitat types occurring on the Property were characterized according to pre-established categories. In classifying the habitat types on the site, the generalized plant community classification schemes of A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens 2009) were consulted. The final classification and characterization of the habitat types of the study area were based on field observations. 6.3 Wildlife Survey Methods The purposes of the wildlife survey were to identify special-status wildlife species and/or potential special-status wildlife habitats within the study area. 6.3.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources A focused review of literature and data sources was conducted in order to determine which special- status wildlife species had potential to occur in the vicinity of the Property. Current agency status information was obtained from USFWS (2020) for species listed as Threatened or Endangered, as well as Proposed and Candidate species for listing, under the federal ESA; and from CDFW (2021b, 2021) for species listed as Threatened or Endangered by the state of California under the CESA or listed as “species of special concern” by CDFW. From the above sources, a list of special- status wildlife species with potential to occur in the Property vicinity was developed (Attachment 2, Table 2). 6.3.2 Field Surveys General Wildlife Survey – An Olberding Environmental biologist conducted a survey of species habitat within the entire study area, including visible portions of the adjacent properties. The purpose of the habitat survey was to evaluate wildlife habitats and the potential for any protected species to occur on or adjacent to the Property. 18 Reconnaissance-Level Raptor Survey – A reconnaissance-level raptor survey was conducted on the Property. Observation points were established on the periphery of the site to view raptor activity over a fifteen- to thirty-minute time period. This survey was conducted with the use of binoculars and notes were taken for each species occurrence. Additionally, utility poles and perch sites in the vicinity of the Property were observed. All raptor activity within and adjacent to the Property was recorded during the reconnaissance-level observation period. Reconnaissance-Level Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) Survey – A reconnaissance-level burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) survey was also conducted on the Property to identify potential burrow sites or burrowing owl use of on-site habitat. The general presence and density of suitable burrow sites (e.g., rodent burrows) was evaluated for the Property. 7.0 RESULTS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The search and review of the CNDDB database reports revealed the occurrence of special-status plant and wildlife species that occur in the habitats found within the Property boundaries (CNDDB 2021). The CNDDB database and background data were reviewed for the surrounding quads. Animal occurrences shown on Attachment 1, Figure 5 and plant occurrences shown on Attachment 1, Figure 6 are located within 5 miles of the Property and were reviewed for their potential to occur on the Property based on general habitat types. Results of the species review is tabulated on Attachment 2, Table 2. Critical habitat within the surrounding quads is shown on Attachment 1, Figure 7. 7.1 Soil Evaluation Results The NRCS (2019) reports two soil types within the Property. A map of this soil type can be found in Attachment 1, Figure 8. The soil type mapped included the following: • TaD: Tierra loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes – Tierra soils are gently sloping to steep and are on dissected terraces and low hills at elevations of 100 to 1,200 feet. The composition of this soil type within the Property consists of 85 percent Tierra and similar soils and 10 percent of minor components including Los Osos (5%) and Millsholm (5%). The Tierra series consists of deep, moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvial materials from sedimentary rocks. Typically, Tierra soils exhibit slow to rapid runoff and very slow permeability. These soils are used mainly for grazing and growing small grains and small areas of large number of crops. Many cultivated areas have reverted to grass. Vegetation dominantly is annual grasses and forbs. This series shows no frequency of ponding or flooding and is nonsaline. Its stratified layers consist of the 19 following (colors are for dry soil unless otherwise stated): Ap--0 to 7 inches; grayish brown loam, very dark grayish brown moist; hard, friable, slightly sticky; strongly acid (pH 5.5). A12--7 to 11 inches; gray loam, very dark gray moist; hard, friable, slightly sticky; medium acid (pH 6.0). B21t--12 to 16 inches; very dark grayish brown clay, very dark brown moist; very hard, very firm, very sticky; slightly acid (pH 6.5). B22t--16 to 25 inches; dark brown clay, dark brown moist; very hard, very firm, very sticky; slightly acid (pH 6.5). B3t--25 to 43 inches; light brownish gray heavy clay loam, grayish brown moist; very hard, firm, sticky; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0). C--43 to 62 inches; pale brown clay loam, dark brown moist; very hard, firm, sticky; mildly alkaline (pH 7.5). • CeA: Conejo Clay Loam, 0-2 percent slopes – The Conejo series consists of very deep, well drained soils with a parent material of alluvium derived from sedimentary rock. These soils are found within valleys at elevation of 10 to 1,000 feet above sea level. The composition of this soil type within the Property consists of 85 percent Conejo and similar soils and 15 percent of minor components including unnamed (5%), Botella (5%), Clear Lake (3%), and Garretson (2%). Ap--0 to 5 inches, (0 to 13 cm); dark gray (10YR 4/1) clay loam, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) moist; 31 percent clay, moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky and strong medium granular structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; many fine and medium irregular pores; slightly alkaline, (pH 7.5) A1--5 to 19 inches, (13 to 48 cm); very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) clay loam, very dark brown (10YR 2/2) moist; 31 percent clay, moderate coarse subangular blocky structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and fine tubular and many fine irregular pores; slightly alkaline (pH 7.5). 20 A2--19 to 30 inches, (48 to 76 cm); very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; 31 percent clay, moderate medium subangular blocky structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and few fine tubular pores; few pressure faces; common fine iron-manganese nodules about l mm diameter; 1 percent gravel; slightly alkaline (pH 7.5). Bw1--30 to 48 inches, (76 to 122 cm); dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; 29 percent clay; moderate coarse subangular blocky structure; very hard, friable, moderately sticky and moderately plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and fine tubular and many fine irregular pores; many pressure faces; few fine iron-manganese nodules about 1 mm diameter; 2 percent gravel; slightly alkaline (pH 7.5). Bw2--48 to 70 inches, (122 to 178 cm); brown (10YR 5/3) loam, dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) moist; 19 percent clay, weak fine and medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, weakly brittle but friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine and few fine and medium tubular pores; slightly effervescent in seams; common medium oxidized iron masses; 1 percent gravel; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0). 7.2 Plant Survey Results 7.2.1 Floristic Inventory and Habitat Characterization The Property supports four habitat types consisting of developed, mixed woodland, perennial creek, and riparian woodland. In classifying the habitat types on the Property, generalized plant community classification schemes were used (Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens 2009). The final classification and characterization of the habitat type of the Property was based on field observations. Plant species that occurred within 5 miles of the Property are shown in Attachment 1, Figure 6. The habitat type and a description of the plant species present within the habitat type are provided below. The habitats found on the Property are mapped on Attachment 1, Figure 10. Dominant plant species are also noted. A complete list of plant species observed on the Property can be found within Attachment 2, Table 1. 21 Mixed Woodland A substantial portion of the 3.05-acre Property, 1.35 acres, is dominated by mixed woodland habitat. Mixed woodland habitat exists in the northern, eastern and western portions of the Property. Dominant vegetation observed within this habitat type includes but is not limited to wild oat, Italian ryegrass, ripgut brome, common vetch (Vicia sativa), cleavers (Galium aparine), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) and Bermuda buttercup (Oxalis pes-caprae). Valley and coast live oaks are present in the central portion of the western mixed woodland habitat. Black walnut and elm trees are located centrally in the eastern portion of the woodland habitat. Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) are also present throughout the mixed woodland habitat. Developed The Property contains two existing residential homes that, combined, encompass approximately 0.22 acres. A two-story home is located on the northwestern boundary along Grayson Road while the other home (one-story) is located centrally near the southern boundary of the Property. The northern residential home is immediately surrounded by mixed woodland habitat to the north in which a large cedar tree is present, coast live oak trees and additional structures including a shed and chicken coop to the south, and black walnut and elm trees to the east. A graded driveway starting at Grayson Road, runs south along the western side of the northern residential home to the southern residential home. The southern home is immediately surrounded by mixed woodland habitat to the north, south and west and woodland riparian habitat to the east. A large coast live oak tree exists at the northeast corner of the residential structure. Perennial Creek Running southwest to northeast along the southern boundary of the property is Grayson Creek, a perennial creek originating in Briones Regional Park. Grayson Creek encompasses approximately 0.06 acres (755 linear feet) of the Property. Approximately 4.6 miles northeast of the Property, Grayson Creek drains into Pacheco Slough, which in turn drains into Suisun Bay, approximately 3.75 miles further north. Dominant vegetation along the banks of Grayson Creek include but are not limited to English ivy (Hedera helix), cleavers and Bermuda buttercup. An oak woodland corridor exists adjacent to Grayson Creek within the Property. 22 Riparian Woodland A riparian woodland corridor of approximately 1.50 acres occurs along Grayson Creek in the southern portion of the Property. Native species found in the riparian habitat include coast live oak, willow (Salix spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica) and California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica). Non-native species present in the riparian woodland include blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) and tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima). Dominant understory plants include English ivy, Bermuda buttercup, periwinkle (Vinca major) and poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum). Special-Status Plant Species Special-status plant species include species listed as Rare, Threatened, or Endangered by the USFWS (2020) or by the State of California (CDFW 2021b). Federal Proposed and Candidate species (USFWS, 2019) are also special-status species. Special-status species also include species listed on List 1A, List 1B, or List 2 of the CNPS Inventory (Skinner and Pavlik, 1994; CNPS 2021). All species in the above categories fall under state regulatory authority under the provisions of CEQA and may also fall under federal regulatory authority. Considered special-status species are species included on List 3 (Plants About Which We Need More Information—A Review List) or List 4 (Plants of Limited Distribution—A Watch List) of the CNPS Inventory. These species are considered to be of lower sensitivity and generally do not fall under specific state or federal regulatory authority. Specific mitigation considerations are not generally required for List 3 and List 4 species. Attachment 2, Table 2 includes a list of special-status plants with the potential to occur within or in the immediate vicinity of the Property based on a review of the surrounding quads. The special- status plant species identified by the CNDDB as potentially occurring on the Property are known to grow only from specific habitat types. The specific habitats or “micro-climate” necessary for many of the plant species to occur are not found within the boundaries of the Property. The habitats necessary for the CNDDB reported plant species consist of valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodlands, chaparral, playas, chenopod scrub, adobe clay soils, alkaline soils, serpentine soils, sandy soils, gravelly soils, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, coastal dunes, coastal bluff scrub, coastal salt marsh, vernal pools, seeps, meadows and sinks, marshes or swamps, riparian woodlands, on slopes near drainages, closed cone coniferous forest, north coast coniferous forest, redwood forest, lower montane coniferous forest, and broad-leafed upland forest. Occurrences of special-status plants within a five-mile radius of the point roughly representing the center of the Property are described in detail. Occurrence distance from the Property is estimated from this center point (Attachment 1, Figure 6). 23 Congdon’s Tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii). CNPS List 1B. Congdon’s tarplant is a member of the genus Hemizonia in the sunflower family (Asteraceae). It is one of four subspecies of Parry’s tarplant (Hemizonia parryi). Congdon’s tarplant is a prostrate to erect, annual herb with rigidly spine-tipped leaves and yellow ray- and disk-flowers (head). It occurs in valley and foothill grasslands in moist alkaline soils and blooms between June and November. Historically, Congdon’s tarplant was distributed from Solano County south to San Luis Obispo County. Four CNDDB occurrences of this species have occurred within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #2) was located approximately 1.2 miles southeast of the Property. A survey completed in 1998 observed that the population previously seen in this location is considered extirpated. Suitable habitat for Congdon’s tarplant exists within the mixed woodland habitat of the Property; however, no plants were present at the time of the survey. The survey performed for this report consisted of a reconnaissance survey performed outside of the identified blooming period of this species (June-November), however remnant plants would have been observed if they were present. For these reasons Congdon’s tarplant is presumed absent from the property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to Congdon’s Tarplant. Diablo Helianthella (Helianthella castanea). CNPS List 1B. Diablo helianthella is a perennial that exhibits yellow sunflowers that bloom between April and June. The plant has simple broad leaves that are attached at the base of the stem and grows up to two feet in height. The Diablo helianthella is known to grow on open grassy sites in cismontane woodland and closed-cone coniferous forests. Eleven CNDDB occurrences of this species have occurred within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #46) was located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the Property in Briones Regional Park. This occurrence involved the observation of 25 plants in 2004. Potentially suitable habitat exists in the understory of the riparian woodland habitat and the mixed woodland habitat. However, the April 2021 survey occurred during the blooming period for Diablo Helianthella and this species was not observed. Therefore, this species has a low potential to occur on site and is presumed absent from the Property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to Diablo helianthella. Mount Diablo Fairy-Lantern (Calochortus pulchellus). CNPS List 1B. Mount Diablo fairy-lantern is a spring blooming bulb that is in flower between April and June. This species exhibits light yellow globe-shaped flowers that turn down as if nodding. The plant grows to approximately one and a half feet tall and has between one to several flowers on the stem 24 and long, narrow, pointed leaves. This bulb specifically grows on wooded slopes in chaparral and in valley and foothill grassland habitat. CNDDB listed six occurrences of this species within five miles of the Property. The closest and most recent occurrence (Occurrence #23) was located approximately 1.5 miles west of the Property in Briones Regional Park. This occurrence involved the observation of 52 plants along Spengler Trail in 2006. The wooded slopes of the oak woodland habitat and the mixed woodland areas of the Property offer potentially suitable habitat for the Mount Diablo fairy-lantern. However, the April 2021 survey coincided with the blooming period for Mount Diablo fairy-lantern and this species was not observed. Therefore, Mount Diablo fairy-lantern has a low potential to occur on site and is presumed absent from the Property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to Mount Diablo fairy-lantern. Bent-Flowered Fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris). CNPS List 1B. Bent-flowered fiddleneck is an annual of the family Boraginaceae. The inflorescence is a scorpiod-cyme and coiled at the tip with multiple small orange flowers. It is distributed throughout the inner north coast ranges of California, in the west Central Valley, and the San Francisco Bay Area. Habitat consists of coastal bluff scrub, cismontane woodlands, and valley and foothill grasslands. The blooming period is between March and June. CNDDB listed four occurrences (Occurrence #75, #41, #30, #43) of this species within five miles of the Property. All occurrences were located within Briones Hills in Briones Regional Park. Although potentially suitable habitat occurs within the mixed woodland habitat, the April 2021 survey of the Property occurred during the blooming period for bent-flowered fiddleneck and this species was not observed. Therefore, bent-flowered fiddleneck has a low potential to occur on site, and is presumed absent from the Property. As a result, no significant impact is identified to bent- flowered fiddleneck. 7.3 Wildlife Survey Results 7.3.1 General Wildlife Species and Habitats A complete list of wildlife species observed within the Property can be found in Attachment 2, Table 1. Wildlife species commonly occurring within habitat types present on the Property are discussed below: 25 Mixed Woodland The mixed woodland habitat provides many foraging opportunities for a wide range of species. Passerine species observed during the survey include dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis), California towhee (Melozone crissalis), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), spotted towhee (Pipilo maculatus), and white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys). Other avian species observed include American crow (Corvus bracyrynchos), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna) and turkey vulture (Cathartes aura). Raptor species observed foraging during the survey included red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, and Cooper’s hawk. However, the mixed woodland habit could potentially be utilized for foraging by other species including sharp-shinned hawk and American kestrel. Scattered burrow colonies created by small mammals including but not limited to Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) and various vole species (Microtus spp.) were observed along the southern edge of the mixed woodland habitat adjacent to the riparian woodland. The cover from the grasses throughout the mixed woodland habitat and the small mammal burrows present offer suitable habitat for various reptile species. Numerous western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis) were observed throughout the Property. Other reptile species including Pacific gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer catenifer) and California king snake (Lampropeltis californiae) may also occur. Developed The existing structures and adjacent mature oak, cedar and ornamental trees provide suitable habitat for numerous bird species and potentially some bats. Avian species observed in the developed area include acorn woodpecker, western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), Steller’s jay (Cyanocitta stelleri), hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus) and dark-eyed junco. Bat species that could utilize this habitat for roosting include hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis), and Western red bat. Perennial Creek Grayson Creek offers suitable foraging opportunities for various insectivorous avian species such as black phoebe and mammalian species such as hoary bat and Yuma myotis. 26 The creek could offer suitable foraging and dispersal habitat for western pond turtle and many amphibian species including, California red-legged frog, Sierran tree frog (Pseudacris sierra), and western toad (Anaxyrus boreas). Riparian Woodland The riparian woodland corridor running adjacent to Grayson Creek has the most chance to provide nesting habitat for passerine and raptor avian species as well as provide roosting habitat for bats including potentially sensitive species like the Western red bat. Numerous avian species were observed in the woodland habitat including spotted towhee, dark- eyed junco, and Steller’s jay. Additionally, a Cooper’s hawk was observed displaying territorial behavior towards a red-tailed hawk which may be indicative of defensive behavior of a nesting site. Pacific tree frog and other amphibian species may also use the area for foraging and breeding. BIRDS Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus). MBTA. The red-shouldered hawk is a medium-sized, slender Buteo with long legs and a long tail and is smaller than the red-tailed hawk. Upperparts are dark with pale spotting, and rusty-reddish feathers on the wing create the distinctive shoulder patch. The tail has several wide, dark bars; the intervening narrow stripes and the tip of the tail are white, and there is variation in the number of tail bars among adults and juveniles. The habitat that the red-shouldered hawk prefers varies from bottomland hardwoods and riparian areas to upland deciduous or mixed deciduous-conifer forest, and almost always includes some form of water, such as a swamp, marsh, river, or pond. In the west, the red-shouldered hawk sometimes occurs in coniferous forests, and has been expanding its range of occupied habitats to include various woodlands, including stands of eucalyptus trees amid urban sprawl. They typically place their nests in a broad-leaved tree (occasionally in a conifer), below the forest canopy but toward the tree top, usually in the crotch of the main trunk. Nest trees are often near a pond, stream, or swamp, and can be in suburban neighborhoods or parks. These hawks eat mostly small mammals, lizards, snakes, and amphibians. They also eat toads, snakes, and crayfish. They occasionally eat birds, sometimes from bird feeders; recorded prey includes sparrows, starlings, and doves. The CNDDB does not track occurrences of red-shouldered hawk. However, two red-shouldered hawks were observed foraging and pair bonding on the Property during the survey. The large trees present within the mixed woodland area, and those found along the riparian corridor offer suitable 27 nesting habitat. In addition, foraging opportunities occur throughout the Property in the mixed woodland habitat. Given the information above the red-shouldered hawk has high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting capacity and was present in a foraging capacity. Red-Tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). MBTA. The red-tailed hawk is a large Buteo that is distinct due to the red color of its tail feathers in contrast to the brown color of its body. Not all red-tailed hawks exhibit the distinct coloration on their tail and gradations may occur especially in young birds. Red-tailed hawks hunt rodents by soaring over grassland habitat. Nest trees for red-tailed hawks are usually tall trees with a well-developed canopy that includes a strong branching structure on which to build a nest. The CNDDB does not track occurrences of red-tailed hawk. However, red-tailed hawks were observed foraging on the Property during the April 2021 survey. The large trees present within and around the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. In addition, foraging opportunities occur throughout the Property. Given the information above the red-tailed hawk has high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting capacity and was present in a foraging capacity. Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii). MBTA. Coopers’ hawk is a medium to large-size raptor, reaching an average of 28-34 in wingspan. They are distinctive for the black and white horizontal banding on the elongated tail, blue gray head, back and upper wings. Additional markings include rusty red horizontal barring on a white breast, a large square head, and long yellow legs and feet. The diet of Cooper’s hawk consists mainly of small to medium-sized birds which they ambush by surprise, but they will also consume squirrels and other small mammals. CNDDB did not list any occurrences of Cooper’s hawk. The large trees present within the riparian habitat on the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. A Cooper’s hawk was observed foraging on the Property and displaying territorial behavior towards a red-tailed hawk during the April 2021 survey. This display may indicate defensive behavior of a nesting site. Given the information above, the Cooper’s hawk has high potential to occur on the Property in a nesting capacity and was present in a foraging capacity. Sharp-Shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus). MBTA. The sharp-shinned hawk is a small raptor with short, rounded wings, and has an average wingspan of 17” to 23”. This hawk has a long tail that is squared-off at tip with prominent corners. This raptor typically flies with several quick, snappy wing beats and a short glide, but also soars. Its small, rounded head does not project far beyond the wings when soaring. The adult sharp-shinned 28 hawk exhibits a red eye, black cap, and a blue-gray back and upper wings. The white breast, belly and under wing coverts are marked by fine, thin, reddish bars. Sharp-shinned hawks specialize in hunting avian prey with songbirds making up 90 percent of its diet. These hawks will occasionally eat small rodents, such as mice and voles, and even some insects. Throughout their range, sharp-shinned hawks favor conifer trees (pine, spruce, or fir) as nesting sites, but may also use aspens and hardwood trees. The nest is always placed under dense forest cover, usually toward the top of a tall tree, but well under the canopy. Most nests are anchored between horizontal limbs and the tree trunk. CNDDB did not list any occurrences of sharp-shinned hawk. However, the large trees present within the riparian habitat on the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. Additionally, foraging opportunities are present in the woodland habitats with the number of passerine bird species observed during the April 2021 survey. Given the information above, sharp-shinned hawk has a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a nesting and foraging capacity and may occur. American Kestrel (Falco sparverius). MBTA. The American kestrel is the smallest of raptor species and is distinct due to the black barring on its face. The female kestrel is slightly larger than the male bird and is differentiated by its brown and red coloration. The male kestrel is slightly smaller than the female and has gray wing patches near the top of the wing. Kestrels favor open areas with short ground vegetation and sparse trees. They are generally found in meadows, grasslands, deserts, parks, farm fields, cities, and suburbs, and are attracted to many habitats modified by humans. Kestrels utilize cavities in trees and structures for nesting. They’re diet consists mostly of insects and other invertebrates, but they also hunt small rodents, birds, and reptiles. CNDDB did not list any occurrences of American kestrel. However, cavities within the large trees present on the Property offer suitable nesting habitat. Additionally, foraging opportunities are present in the woodland habitats with the number of insects, lizards, and passerine bird species observed during the April 2021 survey. Given the information above, American kestrel has a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a nesting and foraging capacity and may occur. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia). Federal Species of Special Concern, California Species of Special Concern. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified the burrowing owl is as a “candidate” species. Candidate species are animals and plants that may warrant official listing as threatened or 29 endangered, but there is no conclusive data to give them this protection at the present time. As a candidate species, burrowing owls receive no legal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, this species does receive some legal protection from the U.S. through the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which forbids the destruction of the birds and active nests. In California, the burrowing owl considered a “species of special concern.” Burrowing owls are ground dwelling members of the owl family and are small brown to tan colored birds with bold spots and barring. Burrowing owls generally require open annual grassland habitats in which to nest, but can be found on abandoned lots, roads, airports, and other urban areas. Burrowing owls generally use abandoned California ground squirrel holes for their nesting burrow but are also known to use pipes or other debris for nesting purposes. Burrowing owls prefer annual grassland habitats with low vegetative cover. The breeding season for burrowing owls occurs from March through August. Burrowing owls often nest in loose colonies about 100 yards apart. They lay three to twelve eggs from mid-May to early June. The female incubates the clutch for about 28 days, while the male provides her with food. The young owls begin appearing at the burrow’s entrance two weeks after hatching and leave the nest to hunt for insects on their own after about 45 days. The chicks can fly well at six weeks old. CNDDB listed two occurrences of burrowing owl within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #1164) was observed approximately 3.0 miles northeast of the Property in Buchanan Field Airport in the City of Concord. During this observation, two unpaired adults were observed along the runway in January 2008. The Property does not have suitable grassland habitat for burrowing owl. Additionally, no ground squirrel burrows were observed on site. A few mammal burrows were present on site however these burrows were most likely constructed by smaller mammals such as pocket gophers and voles, which are inadequate for burrowing owls. Additionally, high vegetative cover is present in the woodland habitat which is a characteristic that burrowing owl do not generally prefer. For these reasons the burrowing owl has a low potential to occur on the Property in nesting and foraging capacity and is not likely to occur. MAMMALS Special-status Bats Bats (Order - Chiroptera) are the only mammals capable of “true” flight. They are nocturnal feeders and locate their prey, which consists of small to medium sized insects by echolocation. Bats consume vast amounts of insects making them very effective pest control agents. They may eat as much as their weight in insects per day. Maternity roosts comprised of only females, may be found in buildings or mine shafts with temperatures up to 40 degrees Celsius and a high percentage of humidity to ensure rapid growth in the young. Female bats give birth to only one or 30 two young annually and roost in small or large numbers. Males may live singly or in small groups, but scientists are still unsure of the whereabouts of most males in summer. Special-status bats with the potential to occur on the Property are listed below: • Western Red Bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) • Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus) • Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) CNDDB listed the hoary bat (Occurrence #20) as occurring within the 5-mile radius of the Property. This occurrence was recorded approximately 2.0 miles east of the Property. The large oak and redwood trees and the existing residential homes could potentially offer roosting sites for multiple bat species. The woodland habitat and Grayson Creek provide an array of insects, allowing for abundant foraging opportunities. Given the above information, multiple species of bats have a moderate potential to occur on the Property in roosting and foraging capacity. AMPHIBIANS California Red-Legged Frog (Rana draytonii). Federally Threatened, California Species of Special Concern. California red-legged frog (CRLF) was listed as a Federal threatened species on May 31, 1996 (61 FR 25813) and is considered threatened throughout its range. If a proposed federal action may affect, and is likely to adversely affect, a listed species, Section 7 of the ESA requires consideration of those species through formal consultations with the USFWS. On April 13, 2006, USFWS designated critical habitat for the CRLF under the ESA. In total, approximately 450,288 acres fell within the boundaries of critical habitat designation. A new ruling by the USFWS on March 17, 2010, revised the designation of critical habitat for CRLF (75 FR 12815 12959). In total, approximately 1,636,609 acres of critical habitat in 27 California counties fall within the boundaries of the final revised critical habitat designation. This rule became effective on April 16, 2010. The CRLF is a rather large frog, measuring one and a half to five inches in length. They are reddish- brown to gray in color, with many poorly defined dark specks and blotches. Dorsolateral folds are present. The underside of the CRLF is washed with red on the lower abdomen and hind legs. The CRLF has a dark mask bordered by a light stripe on the jaw, smooth eardrums, and not fully webbed toes. The male has enlarged forearms and swollen thumbs. Its vocals consist of a series of 31 weak throaty notes, rather harsh, and lasting two to three seconds. Breeding occurs from December to March with egg masses laid in permanent bodies of water. The CRLF is found in lowlands, foothill woodland and grasslands, near marshes, lakes, ponds or other water sources. These amphibians require dense shrubby or emergent vegetation closely associated with deep still or slow-moving water. Generally, these frogs favor intermittent streams with water at least two and a half feet deep and where the shoreline has relatively intact emergent or shoreline vegetation. CRLF is known from streams with relatively low gradients and those waters where introduced fish and bullfrogs are absent. CRLF are known to take refuge upland in small mammal burrows during periods of high-water flow. CRLF occurs west of the Sierra Nevada-Cascade and in the Coast Ranges along the entire length of the state. Historically, they occurred throughout the Central Valley and Sierra Nevada foothills south to northern Baja California. Now they are found from Sonoma and Butte Counties south to Riverside County, but mainly in Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of CRLF occurring within five miles of the Property. The closest occurrence (#158) observed in 2004 was located approximately 2 miles west of the Property. During this occurrence, 3 adult CRLF were observed in two permanent freshwater ponds located within Briones Regional Park. The Property is located approximately 1.3 miles east from USFWS- designated critical habitat for CRLF (Unit ALA-1B)(Attachment 1, Figure 7). Although deep plunge pools are not present within the portion of Grayson Creek that borders the Property, water was present in the entire length of the creek bordering the Property during the April 2021 survey. Vegetative debris throughout the riparian woodland corridor offers suitable upland refugial habitat for CRLF. Therefore, Grayson Creek could offer potential aquatic dispersal and foraging opportunities for CRLF, and the surrounding riparian habitat could offer terrestrial dispersal habitat. For these reasons CRLF has a moderate potential to occur on site in the creek channel and riparian wood habitats in a dispersal capacity only (see Table 2). California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Federally Threatened, State Threatened. Adult California tiger salamanders (CTS) inhabit rolling grassland and oak savannah. Adults spend most of the year in subterranean retreats such as rodent burrows but may be found on the surface during dispersal to and from breeding sites. The preferred breeding sites are vernal pools and other temporary ponds. However, CTS may use permanent manmade ponds as breeding habitat. CTS adults begin migrating to ponds after the first heavy rains of fall and can be found in or around the breeding ponds during and after winter rainstorm events. In extremely dry years, CTS may not reproduce. 32 After mating, females lay several small clusters of eggs, which contain from one to over 100 eggs. The eggs are deposited on both emergent and submerged vegetation, as well as submerged detritus. A minimum of ten weeks is required to complete larval development through metamorphosis, at which time the larvae will normally weigh about ten grams. Larvae remaining in pools for a longer time period can grow to much larger sizes. Upon metamorphosis, juvenile CTS migrate in large masses at night from the drying breeding sites to refuge sites. Prior to this migration, the juveniles spend anywhere from a few hours to a few days near the pond margin. Adult CTS are largely opportunistic feeders, preying upon arthropod and annelid species that occur in burrow systems, as well as aquatic invertebrates found within seasonal pools. The larvae feed on aquatic invertebrates and insects, showing a distinct preference for larvae of the Pacific tree frog. On August 4, 2004, the USFWS announced the listing of the CTS as threatened throughout its range with the exception of the Sonoma and Santa Barbara County populations which are listed as endangered (USFWS 2004). On March 3, 2010, the California Fish and Game Commission designated CTS as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. On August 23, 2005, the Service designated 199,109 acres of critical habitat in 19 counties for the central California population of the CTS. On August 2, 2005, they proposed 74,223 acres of critical habitat for CTS in Sonoma County, California. This habitat is located in the Santa Rosa Plain in central Sonoma and includes lands bordered on the west by Laguna de Santa Rosa, to the south by Skillman Road, northwest of Petaluma, to the east by foothills, and to the north by Windsor Creek. On December 14, 2005, in a final decision, USFWS designated and excluded 17,418 acres of critical habitat for CTS, so that no critical habitat is being designated for the Sonoma County population. CNDDB has listed four occurrences (Occurrence #413, #43, #582, #418) of CTS occurring within five miles of the Property. All four of these occurrences are considered to be historical with the most recent occurrence (Occurrence #418) observed in 1954 and the sites are considered to be extirpated. The Property lacks vernal pools or other ponds suitable for breeding habitat. For these reasons there is a low potential for CTS to occur on the Property and CTS is presumed absent. REPTILES Alameda Whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus). Federally Threatened, State Threatened. The Alameda whipsnake is one of two subspecies of the California whipsnake. It is distinguished from the chaparral whipsnake (M. l. lateralis) by the broad orange striping on its sides. Adults reach approximately three to five feet in length and show a sooty black to dark brown back, cream colored undersides and pinkish tail. This species is typically found in chaparral, northern coastal sage scrub, and coastal sage habitats; however, annual grasslands, oak woodlands, and oak 33 savannah serve as habitat during the breeding season. Egg-laying occurs near scrub habitat on ungrazed grasslands with scattered shrub cover. The known distribution for Alameda whipsnake includes Sobrante Ridge, Oakland Hills, Mount Diablo, the Black Hills, and Wauhab Ridge. Male and female snakes are active from April to November finding mates. During the breeding season from late March through mid-June, male snakes exhibit more movement throughout their home range, while female snakes remain sedentary from March until egg laying. Females lay a clutch of 6 to 11 eggs, usually in loose soil or under logs or rocks. CNDDB listed 13 occurrences of the Alameda whipsnake within the vicinity of the Property. The exact locations of these collections were not recorded in the CNDDB due to the sensitivity of this species. Refer to Attachment 1 Figure 5 to see approximate range of listed occurrences. The Property is located approximately 0.9 miles from USFWS designated critical habitat in Briones Regional Park (unit: 3) (See Attachment 1 Figure 7). The most recent occurrence (# 180) occurred approximately 3.5 miles in 2018. During this occurrence, two Alameda whipsnake were detected in April 2018 on Mount Wanda in Martinez. The closest occurrence (# 62) involved the observation of 1 adult whipsnake in coyote brush scrub in August 2002. This occurrence was located approximately 1.2 miles southwest just outside Briones Regional Park. The Property does not support scrub or rocky outcrop habitat which the Alameda whipsnake prefers. Residential development surrounds the Property which may discourage Alameda whipsnake from using the Property. However, open space parks are also present within the vicinity of the Property; thus, whipsnake could disperse through the Property as it moves to more suitable habitat. For these reasons, Alameda whipsnake has a low potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity only. Western Pond Turtle (Emys marmorata). California Species of Special Concern. The western pond turtle is a thoroughly aquatic turtle that may be found in marshes, ponds, streams and irrigation ditches where aquatic vegetation is present. The turtles, which range from nine to ten inches in size, require basking sites and suitable upland habitat for egg laying. Suitable breeding upland habitats may consist of sandy banks or grassy open fields. The western pond turtle has a dark brown to olive-colored carapace with hexagonal scales that lack prominent markings. Nesting and incubation occur from April to September, with a peak time for mating and egg laying occurring from March to May. After a 73 to 80-day gestation or incubation period, 5 to 13 eggs will be laid from July to October. Eggs are produced either once or twice a year. Females may travel some distance from water for egg-laying, moving as much as 0.8 kilometers (a half mile) away from and up to 90 meters (300 feet) above the nearest source of water. Most nests are within 34 90 meters (300 feet) of water. The female usually leaves the water in the evening and may wander far before selecting a nest site, often in an open area of sand or hardpan that is facing southwards. The nest is flask-shaped with an opening of about five centimeters (two inches). Females spend considerable time covering up the nest with soil and adjacent low vegetation, making it difficult for a person to find unless it has been disturbed by a predator. Activity slows from November to February. During the winter when water and air temperatures cool, usually from September to March, the turtles begin to hibernate. During hibernation, turtles either bury themselves in the mud at the bottom of ponds or will bury themselves on land in duff (top layer of decomposing vegetation and soil). Some turtles travel more than a half mile to over- winter on land, though many select the nearest wooded or shrubby area they can bury in. Turtles then emerge from hibernation in the spring to start the yearly cycle again. CNDDB listed 5 occurrences of the western pond turtle within the vicinity of the Property. The closest occurrence (Occurrence #1360) was located approximately 4 miles northeast of the Property. During this occurrence one adult was observed during a survey of the Clayton Valley drain prior to routine maintenance. The portion of Grayson Creek bordering the Property lacks basking pools and is mostly shaded, however water was present in the creek during the April 2021 survey. Therefore, western pond turtle could potentially use the creek channel and the surrounding riparian woodland corridor as dispersal habitat. Given the information above, western pond turtle has a moderate potential to occur on the Property and may occur in a dispersal capacity only. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPACT ANALYSIS 7.1 Waters Results of the biological resource analysis survey conducted by Olberding Environmental indicate that the Property contains waters that may be considered jurisdictional by the Army Corps of Engineers, RWQCB or CDFW. Grayson Creek runs along the southern boundary of the Property. Although the proposed project does not include conducting any activities within Grayson Creek or the associated riparian corridor, the waters mitigation presented in Section 8.0 would reduce any potential impacts to less-than-significant levels. 7.2 Riparian Habitat The proposed project plans on the removal of approximately 84 trees including native species such as coast live oak, valley oak, black walnut, and buckeye. Native trees that are part of or adjacent to a riparian area, and measure greater than 6.5 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) are 35 considered protected under the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 816-6, Ordinances 94-59, 94-22, Contra Costa County Code). Adherence to County ordinances that pertain to riparian habitat protection including the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance described above and the Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance (Chapter 914) (Attachment 1, Figure 11), and implementation of the mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 would reduce any potential impacts to less-than-significant levels. 7.3 Special-status Plants No special-status plant species were determined to have a potential to occur on the Property. The April 2021 survey coincided with the blooming period of three special-status plants (Diablo helianthella, Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern, bent-flowered fiddleneck) that may have had the potential to occur on the Property and these plants were not observed. Although the survey occurred outside the blooming period for Congdon’s tarplant, remnant plants were not observed. The proposed project will not have an impact to special status plants and no further measures related to protection of special-status plants are recommended. 7.4 Special-status Wildlife Foraging or Nesting Raptor/Passerine Species – A total of five raptor species were identified as having potential to occur on the Property. Three species including red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, and Cooper’s hawk had a high potential to occur in a foraging and nesting capacity and were present in a foraging capacity. The sharp-shinned hawk and American kestrel had a moderate potential to occur in a foraging and nesting capacity. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to nesting avian species protected under the MBTA to less-than-significant levels. Special-Status Mammals – Given the presence of suitable onsite habitat; the Western red bat, hoary bat and Yuma myotis have a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a foraging and roosting capacity. No immediate signs were present during the initial survey; however, large trees throughout the riparian and mixed woodland habitats, and the existing residential structures could provide roosting sites. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to bat species to less-than-significant levels. Special-Status Amphibians – One amphibian species, CRLF, has been identified as having a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity. Multiple CNDDB occurrences and USFWS designated critical habitat of CRLF are recorded in the vicinity of the Property. The Property contains suitable aquatic dispersal habitat and foraging opportunities in Grayson Creek 36 and suitable upland habitat in the riparian corridor. For these reasons CRLF has a moderate potential to occur in a foraging and dispersal capacity throughout the creek channel and associated riparian woodland corridor. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to CRLF to less-than- significant levels. Special-Status Reptiles – The Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle were identified by the CNDDB as occurring in the vicinity of the Property. An assessment of the Property concluded that the Property does not support the shrub and rock outcrop habitat that Alameda whipsnake prefers. More suitable habitat is located west and north of the Property in Briones Regional Park and the surrounding open space. Thus, Alameda whipsnake is not likely to occur on the Property in a breeding capacity or as a permanent resident. The Property is essentially surrounded by residential development; however, areas of open space do occur within the vicinity of the Property. Whipsnake could disperse through the riparian and mixed woodland habitat present within the Property as it migrates through to more suitable habitat. Therefore, Alameda whipsnake has a low potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity only. Western pond turtle could utilize Grayson Creek for aquatic dispersal and the surrounding riparian woodland corridor as terrestrial dispersal. Therefore, western pond turtle has a moderate potential to occur on the Property in a dispersal capacity only. Implementation of the special-status wildlife mitigation measures presented in Section 8.0 below would reduce any potential impacts to western pond turtle or Alameda whipsnake to less-than-significant levels. 8.0 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential Project impacts, listed in Section 4.3.2 (California Environmental Quality Act) of this report, to less than significant levels for the biological resources discussed below. Corps and State Regulated Waters - With implementation of the mitigation measure (MM #1) provided below, the Project would have a less than significant adverse effect on federally protected waters 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. MM #1) Corps and State Regulated Waters – Jurisdictional waters potentially regulated under the authority of the Corps, RWQCB, and CDFW are present on the Property. The proposed project shall implement all County ordinances that require a setback from Grayson Creek to prevent the fill of waters or impacts to Grayson Creek or the bed or bank of the creek. 37 Riparian Habitat - If removal of any trees deemed “protected” by the Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance (Chapter 816-6) from the riparian habitat during project activities is to occur, the above tree ordinance and the Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance (Chapter 914) must be adhered to. With implementation of the mitigation measure (MM #2) provided below, the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by CDFW or USFWS. MM #2) Trees – For all riparian associated trees that are removed from the Property, a 3:1 replacement ratio for all native trees and a 1:1 replacement ratio for all non-native trees (with native species) is recommended by Olberding Environmental. Special-Status Wildlife Species - With implementation of the mitigation measures (MM #3; MM #4; MM #5; MM #6; MM #7; and MM #8) provided below, the Project is not expected to have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW and USFWS. Wildlife corridors and native nurseries - With implementation of the mitigation measures (MM #3; MM #4; MM #5; MM #6; and MM #7) provided below, the Project would not interfere substantially with the movement 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. MM #3) Pre-Construction Avian Survey – If project construction-related activities would take place during the nesting season (February through August), preconstruction surveys for nesting passerine birds and raptors (birds of prey) within the Property and the large trees within the adjacent riparian area should be conducted by a qualified biologist 14 days prior to the commencement of the tree removal or site grading activities. If any bird listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is found to be nesting within the project site or within the area of influence, an adequate protective buffer zone should be established by a qualified biologist to protect the nesting site. This buffer shall be a minimum of 75 feet from the project activities for passerine birds, and a minimum of 200 feet for raptors. The distance shall be determined by a qualified biologist based on the site conditions (topography, if the nest is in a line of sight of the construction and the sensitivity of the birds nesting). The nest site(s) shall be monitored by a biologist periodically to see if the birds are stressed by the construction activities and if the protective buffer needs to be increased. Once the young have fledged and are flying well enough to avoid project 38 construction zones (typically by August), the project can proceed without further regard to the nest site(s). MM #4) Pre-construction Bat Survey – To avoid “take” of special–status bats, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented prior to the removal of any existing trees or structures on the project site: a) A bat habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist during seasonal periods of bat activity (mid–February through mid–October – ca. Feb. 15 – Apr. 15, and Aug. 15 – October 30), to determine suitability of each existing structure as bat roost habitat. b) Structures found to have no suitable openings can be considered clear for project activities as long as they are maintained so that new openings do not occur. c) Structures found to provide suitable roosting habitat, but without evidence of use by bats, may be sealed until project activities occur, as recommended by the bat biologist. Structures with openings and exhibiting evidence of use by bats shall be scheduled for humane bat exclusion and eviction, conducted during appropriate seasons, and under supervision of a qualified bat biologist. d) Bat exclusion and eviction shall only occur between February 15 and April 15, and from August 15 through October 30, in order to avoid take of non–volant (non– flying or inactive, either young, or seasonally torpid) individuals. OR A qualified wildlife biologist experienced in surveying for and identifying bat species should survey the portion of the Property with large trees and abandoned structures. If tree removal is proposed to determine if any special–status bats reside in the trees. Any special–status bats identified should be removed without harm. Bat houses sufficient to shelter the number of bats removed should be erected in open space areas that would not be disturbed by project development. MM #5) Pre-construction Reptile Survey – While potential occurrence of Alameda whipsnake and western pond turtle is limited to dispersal throughout the creek channel, riparian woodland corridor, and mixed woodland habitats, a pre-construction survey for special status reptile species should be performed no more than 48 hours prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine presence/absence of these species. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be 39 conducted by the Designated Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. MM #6) Pre-construction Amphibian Surveys – Directed pre-construction surveys for CRLF are recommended prior to construction activities. The creek channel and associated riparian woodland may serve as dispersal areas for CRLF. A Designated Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of these habitats for CRLF preceding the commencement of construction activities to verify presence/absence of this species. Wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC fencing) should be installed along the grading limit of the Project site in order to prevent dispersal into the grading and work areas of the site from the creek channel and/or the riparian corridor. Fencing should be trenched into the ground at a minimum of 6 inches and a lip should be formed along the top of the fence line. A Designated Biologist or Biological Monitor shall be onsite during initial ground-disturbing activities in order to inspect the work area and fence lines daily for special status amphibians and other wildlife. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species should be conducted by the Designated Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. If any CRLF or other listed amphibians are found during construction activities, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a Qualified Biologist. MM #7) Wildlife Exclusion Fencing – In order to mitigate for potential impacts to CRLF and western pond turtle, heavy-duty wildlife exclusion fencing (ERTEC) should be installed along the grading limit of the proposed project site to prevent these species from entering the project site during construction activities. Exclusion fencing should be trenched into the ground at a minimum of 6 inches and a lip shall be folded along the upper portion of the fence line. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a Designated Biologist prior to vegetation clearing and fence installation. MM #8) Erosion Control – Grading and excavation activities could expose soil to increased rates of erosion during construction periods. During construction, runoff from the Property could adversely affect aquatic life within the adjacent water features. Surface water runoff could remove particles of fill or excavated soil from the site, or could erode soil down-gradient, if the flow were not controlled. Deposition of eroded material in adjacent water features could increase turbidity, thereby endangering aquatic life, and reducing wildlife habitat. Implementation of appropriate mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to aquatic organisms would be avoided or minimized. Mitigation measures may include best management practices (BMP’s) such as hay bales, silt fencing, placement of straw mulch and hydro seeding of exposed soils after construction as identified in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). 40 Habitat Conservation Plans - The proposed project does not lie within the East Contra Costa County HCP/NCCP or any other HCP/NCCP. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Local Ordinances - With implementation of the mitigation measures provided above, plus MM #2 provided above, the project is not expected to conflict with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, including the Contra Costa County tree protection and setback ordinances: • Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance – Chapter 816-6 – Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance discussed in Section 4.2.4 of this report • Contra Costa County Creek Setback Ordinance – Chapter 914 – Rights-of-Ways and Setbacks discussed in Section 4.2.5 of this report 41 9.0 LITERATURE CITED California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Natural Diversity Data Base. 2021. Computer listings and map locations of historic and current recorded occurrences of special-status species and natural communities of special concern for USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map: Walnut Creek. Accessed on April 5, 2021. __________.2021a. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships. https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR/Wildlife-Habitats __________.2021b. State and federally listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare plants of California. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109390&inline __________.2021. Special animals. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Rare Plant Program. 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org Accessed April 5, 2021. CEQA. 2021. The California Environmental Quality Act. Appendix G, Environmental Checklist Form. Accessed on April 6, 2021. Available online at https://www.califaep.org/statute_and_guidelines.php Ehrlich, P.R., D.S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The Birder’s Handbook: a field guide to the natural history of North American birds. Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York. 785 pp. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition, Thoroughly Revised and Expanded. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. 2012. 1400 pp. Holland (1986) Preliminary Description of the Natural Communities of California. CDFW. Mayer, K. E. and Laudenslayer W.F. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. California. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Accessed April 5, 2021. Available on-line at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Pierce, Robert J. 1995. Wetland Delineation Lecture Notes. Wetland Training Institute, Inc., Poolesville, MD. WTI 95-2. 200pp. 42 Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. Evens. 2009. A manual of California vegetation. 2nd Ed. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. Skinner, M. W. and B. M. Pavlik (eds.). 1994. Inventory of rare and endangered vascular plants of California. California Native Plant Society Special Publication No. 1 (5th edition). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. 338 pp. Sibley, D.A. 2000. The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred Knopf, New York. Sibley, C.G., and B.L. Munroe, Jr. 1990. Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. Yale University Press, New Haven and London. 1111 pp. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. Endangered and threatened plant and animal species. Accessed on April 6, 2021. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/listedSpecies/speciesListingsByTaxGroupTotalsPage __________. 2019. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; review of plant and animal taxa that are Candidates or Proposed for listing as Endangered or Threatened; annual notice of findings on recycled petitions; annual description of progress on listing actions; proposed rule. Federal Register 68: 54732-54757. __________. 2007. Bald Eagle Management Guidelines and Conservation Measures. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Accessed on April 6, 2021. Available on-line at http://www.fws.gov/northeast/ecologicalservices/pdf/NationalBaldEagleManagementGui delines.pdf. _________. 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Designation of Critical Habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog, and Special Rule Exemption Assocaited with Final Listing for Existing Routine Ranching Activities; Final Rule. Federal Register 71: 19244- 19346. _________. 2004. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Determination of Threatened Status for the California Tiger Salamander; and Special Rule Exemption for Existing Routine Ranching Activities; Final Rule. Federal Register 69: 47212-47248. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Map Figure 2 Vicinity Map Figure 3 USGS Quadrangle Map Figure 4 Aerial Photograph Figure 5 CNDDB Map of Special Status Wildlife Figure 6 CNDDB Map of Special Status Plants Figure 7 USFWS Designated Critical Habitat Figure 8 Soils Map Figure 9 Photo Location Map Figure 10 Habitat Map Figure 11 Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank Figure 1 Regional Map ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 1: Regional MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 4 82Miles Scale:1:250,000 1 in = 4 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig1_Regional.mxd ^_Property LocationPrint at 8.5" x 11" Figure 2 Vicinity Map 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 2: Vicinity MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1,000 2,000500Feet Scale:1:12,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig2_Vicinity.mxd Survey BoundaryPrint at 8.5" x 11" Lomu V•des Pl w o, O LBERDING ·ENVI RONMENT A L- . .., Cle-,u Cree.ICC\ "' ~ .2 !. snstol Ct Tw1nv1ew PJ ! <} ~ ., 0 ~ •'> ii . ..,,., <', -j c::::J Barlor L.ndt lolcr; Upson Ct Kingsley Ct Cortten Ct Rampo Ct ~ 8¥ocloC1 Waterberry Dr Jemco C tJ c 5 ~•Or i X ~ Boyd Rd l "'•M ' Ridgevale Ln Atrlce Ln Chatllon Or ~.,,on Cir Q ! • > Harg:ate Cl u 0 Figure 3 USGS Quadrangle Map 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 3: USGS Topographic MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1,000 2,000500Feet Scale:1:12,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig3_USGS.mxd Survey BoundaryPrint at 8.5" x 11" Walnut Creek USGS 7.5' Quadrangle 37.947601°, -122.095188° T01N, R02W, S9 O LBERDING ·ENV I RONMENT A L· Figure 4 Aerial Photograph 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 4: Aerial MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig4_Aerial.mxd Survey BoundaryPrint at 8.5" x 11" O LBERDING ·ENV I RONMENT A L· Figure 5 CNDDB Map of Special Status Wildlife ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 5: CNDDB Wildlife MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Scale:1:100,000 1 in = 2 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig5_CNDDB Wildlife.mxd ^_Property Location 5-mile bufferCNDDB Wildlife Alameda whipsnake American peregrine falcon Bridges' coast range shoulderband California linderiella California red-legged frog California tiger salamander Northern California legless lizard Suisun song sparrow Townsend's big-eared bat big free-tailed bat burrowing owl foothill yellow-legged frog hoary bat obscure bumble bee pallid bat salt-marsh harvest mouse tricolored blackbird western bumble bee western pond turtle yellow railPrint at 8.5" x 11" O LBERDING ·ENV I RONMENT A L· Figure 6 CNDDB Map of Special Status Plants ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 6: CNDDB Plants MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Scale:1:100,000 1 in = 2 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig6_CNDDB Plants.mxd ^_Property Location 5-mile bufferCNDDB Plants Antioch Dunes evening-primrose Bolander's water-hemlock Carquinez goldenbush Congdon's tarplant Contra Costa goldfields Delta tule pea Diablo helianthella Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern San Joaquin spearscale bent-flowered fiddleneck big tarplant long-styled sand-spurrey oval-leaved viburnum soft salty bird's-beakPrint at 8.5" x 11" O LBERDING ·ENVI RONMENT A L· CJ -CJ -CJ -CJ ---CJ -Cl - Figure 7 USFWS Designated Critical Habitat ^_ 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 7: USFWS Designated Critical Habitat MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Scale:1:100,000 1 in = 2 miles Revision Date: 4/15/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig7_CritHab.mxd ^_Property Location 5-mile buffer Alameda whipsnake California red-legged frog Delta smeltPrint at 8.5" x 11" Unit: 1 Unit: CCS-1 Unit: 4 Unit: CCS-2A Unit: 2 Unit: 6 O LBERDING ·ENV I RONMENT A L· Figure 8 Soils Map TaD CeA 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 8: Soils MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig8_Soils.mxd Survey BoundarySSURGO Soil Type CeA: Conejo clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, MLRA 14 TaD: Tierra loam, 9 to 16 percent slopes, MLRA 14Print at 8.5" x 11" O LBERDING ·ENV I RONMENT A L· Figure 9 Photo Location Map °!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!(°!( 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 9: Photo Points MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig9_PhotoPoints.mxd Survey Boundary °!(Photo PointsPrint at 8.5" x 11" O LBERDING ·ENV I RONMENT A L· Figure 10 Habitat Map 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 10: Habitat MapGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I 0 100 20050Feet Scale:1:1,200 1 inch = 100 feet Revision Date: 4/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig10_Habitats.mxd Survey BoundaryHabitat Type Creek Developed Woodland Mixed Oak WoodlandPrint at 8.5" x 11" O LBERDING ·ENV I RONMENT A L· Figure 11 Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank 193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: (916) 985-1188 Figure 11: Drip Line ExhibitGrayson Road PropertyContra Costa County, California I0 50 10025Feet Scale:1:600 1 inch = 50 feet Revision Date: 2/7/2022 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig1_Top-of-Bank&Drip Line Exhibit-2-07-2022.mxd Property Boundary Canopy Dripline of Trees at or Below Top-of-Bank Top-of-Bank Print at 8.5" x 11" Aerial Imagery: Drone Flight Orthomosaic - 10/16/2021 Document Path: E:\Google Drive\Olberding\Grayson Road Pleasanton\MXDs\Fig1_Top-of-Bank&Drip Line Exhibit-2-07-2022.mxd A OLBERDING -f.N VIRONMENTAI.· ATTACHMENT 2 SITE PLANS G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 PLAN 1 LOT 2 PLAN 3 LOT 3 PLAN 3 LOT 4 PLAN 2 LOT 5 PLAN 1LOT 6 PLAN 3 LOT 7 PLAN 3 LOT 8 PLAN 3 LOT 9 PLAN 2 LOT 10 PLAN 3* 1" = 20' VTM-7 BUILDING LAYOUT CONCEPTUAL No. 61148 SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 Date: Job No.: By: Scale: 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 YEARS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526 (925) 837-3780 | DEBOLTCIVIL.COM 1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROAD VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 08/20/21 EM 19300 >- Ill 0---ot-t-OH-OH- I --_j I I J OH-OH-OH -OH-01-1-0H-OH-OH ---- -OH-OH -OH-OH-OH t}- P. 12/3 CIVIi. c~ "' "' ------------" - ( I I I ___, ---- / -- \ EASTON C McALLIS RENEWAL DATE 1;:i~; R.C.E. 61148 ----_,,, ~ I I . •. --,-- ------- GRAPHIC SCALE 20 ! r ,,o r i ( IN FEET ) l . inch = 20 ft. # REVISIONS DATE D DEBOLT Cl 45 ♦ VIL ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT 3 TABLES Table 1 Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Table 1 Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Scientific Name Common Name Plant Species Observed Salix spp. Willow species Aesculus californica California buckeye Avena fatua Wild oat Galium aparine Cleavers Ulmus pumila Siberian Elm Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome Vinca major Periwinkle Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle Claytonia perfoliata Miner’s lettuce Medicago polymoprha Bur clover Festuca perennis Italian rye grass Oxalis pes-caprae Bermuda buttercup Torilis arvensis Field hedgeparsley Sequoia sempervirens Coast redwood Pyrus communis Common pear Prunus cerasifera Cherry plum Calocedrus spp. Cedar Hedera helix English ivy Vicia sativa Common vetch Plantago lanceolata English plantain Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak Quercus lobata Valley oak Juglans nigra Black walnut Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry Silybum marianum Milk thistle Toxicodendron diversilobum Western poison oak Pinus radiata Monterey pine Umbellularia californica California bay laurel Eucalyptus globulus Blue gum Animal Species Observed Birds Aphelocoma californica Western scrub jay Table 1 Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area Scientific Name Common Name Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Cathartes aura Turkey vulture Cyanocitta stelleri Steller’s Jay Junco hyemalis Dark-eyed junco Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker Melozone crissalis California towhee Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s hawk Buteo lineatus Red-shouldered hawk Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow Reptiles Sceloporus occidentalis Western fence lizard Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps1 Common Name/Scientific Name Status (Fed/State/ CNPS)2 Blooming or Survey Period Habitats of Occurrence Potential on Site Status on Site** PLANTS Antioch Dunes Evening Primrose (Oenothera deltoides ssp. howellii) E/E/1B March – September Inland dunes. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Bent-flower Fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris) -/-/1B March – June Coastal bluff scrub, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Big tarplant (Blepharizonia plumosa) -/-/1 July - October Valley grassland, foothill woodland, chaparral. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Bolander’s Water-Hemlock (Cicuta maculata var. bolanderi) -/-/2B July – September Coastal, salt marsh and wetland riparian. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent California Linderiella (Linderiella occidentalis) SOC/-/- December – May (dependent on the timing of winter and spring rains) Seasonal pools in unplowed grasslands with old alluvial soils underlain by hardpan or in sandstone depressions. Water in the pools has very low alkalinity and conductivity. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Carquinez Goldenbush (Isocoma arguta) -/-/1B August – December Alkaline valley and foothill grassland. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps1 Common Name/Scientific Name Status (Fed/State/ CNPS)2 Blooming or Survey Period Habitats of Occurrence Potential on Site Status on Site** Congdon’s Tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii) -/-/1B June – November Valley and foothill grasslands in alkaline soils. Moderate Suitable habitat present. Presumed absent Contra Costa Goldfields (Lasthenia conjugens) E/-/1B March – June Valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland, and vernal pools, swales, and low depressions in open grassy areas. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Delta Tule Pea (Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsonii) -/-/1B May – July Freshwater wetlands, wetland-riparian, freshwater marsh, brackish marsh. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Diablo Helianthella (Helianthella castanea) -/-/1B March – June Broadleafed upland forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Usually in chaparral/oak woodland interface in rocky, azonal soils, often in partial shade. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Hall’s Bush-Mallow (Malacothamnus hallii) -/-/1B May – September Chaparral, coastal scrub. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Long-Styled Sand Spurrey (Spergularia macrotheca longistyla) -/-/1B February – May Alkaline meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Table 2 Special-Status Species for the Walnut Creek, Benicia, Vine Hill, Honker Bay, Briones Valley, Clayton, Oakland East, Las Trampas Ridge, Diablo 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Maps1 Common Name/Scientific Name Status (Fed/State/ CNPS)2 Blooming or Survey Period Habitats of Occurrence Potential on Site Status on Site** Mount Diablo Fairy-Lantern (Calochortus pulchellus) -/-/1B April – June Chaparral, cismontane woodland, riparian woodland, and valley and foothill grassland; on wooded and brushy slopes. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Oval-Leaved Viburnum (Viburnum ellipticum) -/-/2B May – June Chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur San Joaquin spearscale (Atriplex joaquiniana) -/-/1B April-October Chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, valley and foothill grassland in seasonal alkali wetlands or alkali sink scrub with Distichlis spicata, Frankenia, etc. Low Surveyed during blooming period Presumed absent Soft Salty Bird’s Beak (Chloropyron molle ssp. molle) E/R/1B July – November Coastal salt marsh, wetland-riparian. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent BIRDS American Kestrel (Falco sparverius) -/CP/- February – August Various grassland habitats, urban land, oak woodlands with grassland for foraging. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur American Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) -/-CP/- February – August Nests near wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other water. On cliffs, banks, dunes, mounds, and human-made structures. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) SOC/-/SC February – August Dry open annual or perennial grassland, desert and scrubland. Uses abandoned mammal burrows for nesting. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) -/CP/- February – August Oak woodlands, coniferous forests, riparian corridors. Often hunts on edges between habitats. High Suitable habitat present Present Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis) -/CP/- Late Fall – Winter Open country such as semiarid grasslands with few trees, rocky outcrops, and open valleys. Also along streams or in agricultural areas during migration. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) -/CP/SC February – August Nests in cliff-walled canyons and tall trees in open areas. (Nesting and wintering) Rolling foothills mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert. Low No suitable habitat present Not Likely to Occur Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) ROOKERIES -/-/- February – August (Rookery) Nests in tall trees in close proximity to foraging areas such as marshes and streams. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Great Egret (Ardea alba) ROOKERIES -/-/- February – August Freshwater, brackish and marine wetlands. Form breeding colonies on lakes, ponds, marshes, estuaries or islands. Forage in marshes, swamps, streams, rivers, ponds, tidal flats, canals and flooded fam fields. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) -/CP/- February – August Forages in variety of semi-developed habitats including orchards. Forages in woodlands and riparian areas. Nests in riparian habitat but also eucalyptus groves. High Suitable habitat present Present Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) -/CP/- February – August Various grassland habitats, urban land, oak woodlands with grassland for foraging. High Suitable habitat present Present Sharp-Shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus) -/CP/- February – August Oak woodlands, coniferous forests, riparian corridors. Often hunts on edges between habitats. (Nesting) Ponderosa pine, black oak, riparian deciduous, mixed conifer, and Jeffrey pine habitats. Prefers riparian areas. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur Suisun Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia maxillaris) -/-/SC February – August Inhabits tidal salt marshes, needs vegetation for nesting sites. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsonii) -/T/- February – October Nests in riparian areas and in oak savannah near foraging areas. Forages in alfalfa and grain fields with rodent populations. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) SOC/-/SSC February – August Nesting within seasonal wetland marshes, blackberry brambles or other protected substrates. Forages in annual grassland and wetland habitats. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus) SOC/CP/FP February – August Various grassland habitats, urban land, oak woodlands with grassland for foraging. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Yellow Rail (Coturnicops noveboracensis) -/-/SSC February - August Salt or brackish marshes or wet meadows. Prefers habitats with tall, dense vegetation such as sedges or cattails. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent MAMMALS Big Free-Tailed Bat (Nyctinomops macrotis) -/-/SSC Resident Inhabits rocky or canyon country where it roosts in crevices. Arid landscapes such as desert shrub, woodlands and evergreen forests. Low No suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus) -/-/- Resident Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics with access to trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees near water. Feeds mainly on moths. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur Pallid Bat (Antrozous pallidus) -/SC/- N/A Forages in grasslands, shrublands, deserts, forests, and woodlands. Most common in open, dry habitats. Roosts in rock crevices, caves, tree hollows, and buildings. Roosts must protect bats from high temperatures; very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris) E/E/FP Resident Salt marshes with dense stands of pickleweed and other dense wetland vegetation such as cattails or bullrush. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) -/SSC/- Resident Throughout California in a wide variety of habitats; roosts in the open, hanging from walls and ceilings. Needs sites free from human disturbance. Most common in mesic sites. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur Western Red Bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) -/-/SSC Resident Winter in western lowlands and coastal regions of the San Francisco Bay. Roosts in forests and woodlands. Feed in grasslands, shrublands, open woodlands and forests and croplands. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur Yuma Myotis (Myotis yumanensis) -/-/- Resident Optimal habitats are open forests and woodlands with sources of water over which to feed. Maternal colonies occur in caves, mines, buildings or crevices. Moderate Suitable habitat present May occur AMPHIBIAN California Red-Legged Frog (Rana draytonii) T/-/SC May 1 – November 1 Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent deep water with dense, shrubby or emergent riparian habitat. Requires 11-20 weeks of permanent water for breeding and larval development. Must have access to aestivation habitat. Moderate Suitable dispersal habitat present May occur in a dispersal capacity only California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) T/T/- Aquatic Surveys - Once each in March, April, and May with at least 10 days between surveys. Upland Surveys - 20 nights of surveying under proper conditions beginning October 15 and ending March 15. Vernal pools, swales and depressions for breeding, needs underground refugia. Low No suitable habitat present Presumed absent Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog (Rana boylii) SOC/-/SC Year-round resident Partially-shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Need cobble for egg- laying. Low Suitable habitat present Not likely to occur REPTILE Alameda Whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) T/T/- Year-round resident Valley-foothill hardwood habitat of the coast ranges between Monterey and north San Francisco Bay areas. Inhabits south-facing slopes and ravines where shrubs form a vegetative mosaic with oak trees and grasses. Low Suitable dispersal habitat present May occur in a dispersal capacity only Western Pond Turtle (Emys marmorata) -/-/SC March – October Aquatic turtle needs permanent water in ponds, streams, irrigation ditches. Nests on sandy banks or grassy fields. Moderate Suitable dispersal habitat present May occur in a dispersal capacity only 1. Special-status plants and animals as reported by the California Natural Diversity Data Base, California Native Plant Society, and other background research April 2021 2. Order of Codes for Plants - Fed/State/CNPS Order of Codes for Animals - Fed/State/CDFW Codes: SOC - Federal Species of Concern SC - California Species of Special Concern E - Federally/State Listed as an Endangered Species T - Federally/State Listed as a Threatened Species C - Species listed as a Candidate for Federal Threatened or Endangered Status R - Rare D - Delisted CP- California protected FP - State Fully Protected DFG: SC California Special Concern species 1B - California Native Plant Society considers the plant Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. 1A - CNPS Plants presumed extinct in California. 2 - CNPS Plants Rare, Threatened or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. 3 - CNPS Plants on a review list to find more information about a particular species. 4 - CNPS Plants of limited distribution - a watch list. ATTACHMENT 4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 1. Photo taken facing south showing the two-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat at northwestern boundary of Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 2. Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat within the northeastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. OLBERDING ·ENVIRONMENTAL · Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 3. Photo taken facing west showing riparian woodland habitat within the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 4. Photo taken facing northeast showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. OLBERDING ·ENVIRONMENTAL · Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 5. Photo taken facing southeast showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat within the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 6. Photo taken facing south showing the single-story residential home and surrounding woodland habitat located near the southern boundary of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. OLBERDING ·ENVIRONMENTAL · Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 7. Photo taken facing west showing mixed woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 8. Photo taken facing south showing mixed woodland and riparian woodland habitat in the western portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. OLBERDING ·ENVIRONMENTAL · Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 9. Photo taken facing southeast showing portion of Grayson Creek. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 10. Photo taken facing southeast showing Grayson Creek and associated riparian woodland corridor. Photo taken April 6, 2021. OLBERDING ·ENVIRONMENTAL · Grayson Road Property – 4/6/2021 11. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland with existing residential structure in the background. Photo taken April 6, 2021. 12. Photo taken facing northwest showing mixed woodland habitat in the eastern portion of the Property. Photo taken April 6, 2021. OLBERDING ·ENVIRONMENTAL · Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 ATTACHMENT B Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road (prepared by Traverso Tree Service) Traverso Tree Service Phone: 925-930-7901 • 4080 Cabrilho Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 • Fax: 925-723-2442 May 6, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) Andy Byde Calibr Ventures bydeandy@gmail.com RE: Revised Arborist Report for the Development of 1024-1026 Grayson Road Project Summary This report updates the 2006 arborist report with current tree assessment and measurements, and anticipated tree impact. Trees proposed for removal are estimated based on proposed grading and building footprints. Actual impacts may vary once homes are designed. A supplemental arborist report may be necessary at that time. This 10/17/22 revision adds 13 trees (#301-313) along the creek that were omitted in prior reports. The scope of work did not include review of updated plans and health/structure reassessment of other trees, though the locations of a few trees were adjusted. Site Summary A total of 130 trees > 6” in diameter were inventoried. It is my opinion that 97 trees will need to be removed to accommodate the proposed project. The remaining trees can be retained given that the protection measures within this report are followed. Assumptions & Limitations This report is based on my site visit on 5/4/20 & 10/11/22, and existing conditions & demolition plan by Debolt Civil Engineering dated 3/9/22 (plot date 10/13/22). It was assumed that the trees and the proposed improvements were accurately surveyed. Several trees were not surveyed or appear to be located incorrectly, so I roughly located them on the tree protection plan based on their proximity to adjacent surveyed trees. Since it was difficult to tell which trees were accurately located, the approximate locations will likely need to be resurveyed if precision is needed. The health and structure of the trees were assessed visually from ground level. No drilling, root excavation, or aerial inspections were performed. Internal or non-detectable defects may exist and could lead to part or whole tree failures. Due to the dynamic nature of trees and their environment, it is not possible for arborists to guarantee that trees will not fail in the future. Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 2 Tree Inventory & Assessment Table #s: Each tree was given a square metal tag with numbers ranging from 102-206 & circular tags from #301-313. (Note: as of 2022, tags are likely engulfed by trunk growth.) Trees with letters attached (a, b, or c) were new young trees that have grown up to protected size since the 2006 inventory. Their locations are shown on the attached the tree inventory plan. DBH (Diameter at Breast Height): Trunk diameters in inches were measured at 4.5’ above average grade with a diameter tape. Height of measurement may deviate slightly from the standard on atypical trunks. Health & Structural Condition Rating Dead: Dead or declining past chance of recovery. Poor (P): Stunted or declining canopy, poor foliar color, possible disease or insect issues. Severe structural defects that may or may not be correctable. Usually not a reliable specimen for preservation. Fair (F): Fair to moderate vigor. Minor structural defects that can be corrected. More susceptible to construction impacts than a tree in good condition. Good (G): Good vigor and color, with no obvious problems or defects. Generally more resilient to impacts. Very Good (VG): Exceptional specimen with excellent vigor and structure. Unusually nice. Dripline: Canopy radius was visually estimated in each cardinal direction. Age Young (Y): Within the first 20% of expected life span. High resiliency to encroachment. Mature (M): Between 20% - 80% of expected life span. Moderate resiliency to encroachment. Overmature (OM): In >80% of expected life span. Low resiliency to encroachment. DE: Dripline Encroachment (X indicates encroachment) CI: Anticipated Construction Impact (L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High) Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 3 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 101 Coast live oak This tree no longer exists. Old report stated it as a 9” tree. No evidence of a stump was found. N/A 102 Valley oak 16 G-F G 20 25 20 20 Y X M Epicormic sprouts along scaffold branches. Within west p/l set back, some grading will likely occur within dripline. Save Set protection fencing at dripline (d/l), and have arborist on site for any d/l encroachment. 103 Fruiting pear 10, 5, 5, 4, 4 P P 10 0 10 10 OM X H Declining tree. In proposed driveway Remove 104 Valley oak 18, 19, 20, 12 G G 30 30 30 30 M X H Co-dominant stems at 3'. In proposed driveway. Remove 105 Coast live oak 11, 7, 6 F-P F 15 15 10 0 M X H Co-dominant stems. Understory tree. Within building footprint. Remove 106 Valley oak 11, 12 G F 25NW-W M X H Co-dominant stems. Within building footprint. Remove 107 Valley oak 4, 3, 12, 11, 5, 7, 5 G F 25 0 18 25 M X H Basal shoot from old stump. In proposed driveway. Within building footprint. Remove 107 B Coast live oak 11, 5, 8 F P 15 0 0 25 M X H Growing out from base of #107. Co-dominant trunks. Within building footprint. Remove 108 Coast live oak 17 F F 25NW-W M X H Curved trunk. Within building footprint. Remove 109 Valley oak 12, 11, 7, 6 F F 30N M X H One sided tree to the N/W. Dieback & epicormic sprouting. Within building footprint. Remove 110 Valley oak 20, 11, 11, 16 G F 25 25 0 25 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within building footprint. Remove 111 Coast live oak 19 F-P F 20 25 20 20 M X H Bark inclusion on all 3 attachments. Sparse with stunted growth. Within building footprint. Remove 112 Coast live oak 11 F P 0 6 10 10 Y X H Top broken at 12' with sprouting. Within building footprint. Remove 113 Valley oak 7 F P 6S Y X H Sparse canopy, 2 trunks removed. Within building footprint. Remove 114 Valley oak 7, 4 F F 6 6 6 6 Y X H Crowded. Within building footprint. Remove 115 Coast live oak 13 G G 12 0 8 10 Y X H 3" from base of #116; crowded. Within building footprint. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 4 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 116 Valley oak 7, 6 F F 18N Y X H Very crowded. Co-dominant trunks; sweeping lean to N. Within building footprint. Remove 117 Coast live oak 17 F-P F-P 15NE M L Sparse understory tree. Outside of grading limits. Save 118 Valley oak 14, 18 F F 15 15 20 20 M L Co-dominant stem bends to N. Outside of grading limits. Save 119 Coast live oak 17 Dead Remove. 120 Coast live oak 17 F-P F 10 10 10 10 M L Ivy covering trunk. In decline; sycamore borer damage. Treat for Borer. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 121 Valley oak 13 F F 20S Y L Ivy covering trunk. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 122 Valley oak 22 P P 25N M L Ivy covering trunk. Declining canopy; sweeping lean to N. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 122 A Coast live oak 30 F F 50N M L In creek structure setback. Significant lean to N. Ivy covering trunk. Outside of grading limits in creek setback. Save 123 Valley oak 14, 7, 7, 10, 10 F F 0 25 0 15 M X H Sparse canopy. Co-dominant stems at 6'. Within grading limits Remove 124 Valley oak 16 F G 15 20 15 8 M X H Tag embedded in trunk. Epicormic sprouts. Within grading limits Remove 124 B Coast live oak 7 F P 6 10 4 0 Y X H 90° correcting bend in trunk. Within grading limits Remove 125 Chinese pistache 27 G G 25 25 25 25 OM X H Dieback; slightly drought stressed. Within grading limits Remove 126 Chinese pistache 17, 17, 10, 8 F G 25 25 25 6 OM X H Within grading limits Remove 127 Coast live oak 17 G G 15 0 0 20 M X H Within grading limits Remove 128 Valley oak 19 G F 20 25 0 20 M X H Within grading limits Remove 129 Valley oak 14 G F 0 20 20 20 Y X H Within grading limits Remove 130 Coast live oak 16 F G 15 15 10 0 Y X H Sparse lower canopy. Within grading limits Remove 131 Calif. Buckeye 11, 8 F F 15 20 25 20 M X H Dead lower/interior canopy. Within grading limits Remove 131 B Valley oak 18 F F 35N M X H Not surveyed. 35° lean to N. Ivy and poison oak covering trunk. Within grading limits Remove 132 Coast live oak 11 F F 40N Y X H 10° lean to N. Tag engulfed by trunk. Within grading limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 5 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 133 Coast live oak 14 G F 40N-20NW Y X H 10° lean to N. Within grading limits Remove 134 Monterey pine 50 P F 50 50 50 50 OM X M Over mature tree, in declining years. Sparse canopy. Removed 135 Coast redwood 18, 18, 10 F G 20 20 20 20 M X H Drought stressed, needs irrigation. Within grading limits. Remove 135 A Calif. Buckeye 6, 8, 11, 7, 7, 9, 11, 8 G G 20 20 20 20 M L Within creek structure set back. ~3 trunk clusters treated as one. Save 136 Silver dollar eucalyptus (Eucalyptus cinerea) 13, 16 F F 25 15 10 0 M X H Failed trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 137 Coast live oak 40 G-F P 35 35 35 35 M X M- H Ivy covering trunk. Co-dominant stems at 4' with included bark. Grading just north of trunk proposed. Pull grade limits at least 15’ from trunk in order to save tree. Save If grading can be adjusted. 138 Valley oak 18 F F 15 15 5 0 M X M- H Ivy covering trunk. Grading just north of trunk. Recommend pulling grade limits at least 10’ from trunk. Save If grading can be adjusted 138 B Buckeye 17, 12, 13, 14, 15, 13, 12, 10, 10, 13 F-P/P F 20 20 20 20 M L In creek structure setback. Top dieback. Save 139 Mimosa Dead Within grading limits. Remove 140 Coast live oak 17 G G 18 18 18 18 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 141 Coast live oak 9 G G 10 10 10 10 Y X H Tag embedded in trunk but readable. Within grading limits. Remove 142 Coast live oak 19, 20 G F 30 30 10 10 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within grading limits. Remove 142 B Coast live oak 20 G F 30 0 0 20 M X H In creek structure setback. Within grading limits. Remove 142 C Coast live oak 14 G G 20 15 0 0 Y X H Not surveyed. 143 Valley oak 15 G-F G 12 12 12 12 Y X H Ivy on trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 144 Valley oak 11 G F 15SE Y X H Ivy on trunk. Understory tree. Within grading limits. Remove 145 Coast live oak 22 G-F G 25 20 18 20 M X H Ivy on trunk. Within grading limits. Remove 146 Coast live oak 18, 15 G F 25 0 20 25 M X H Co-dominant trunks. Within grading limits. Remove 147 Fruiting plum Dead X H Within grading limits. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 6 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 148 Persimmon 6, 7 G P 6 15SE 5 M X H Leaders poorly attached, breaking apart. Within grading limits. Remove 149 Black Walnut 7, 6 G F 8 15 15 0 Y X H Within grading limits. Remove 149 B Valley oak 7 G F 25NE Y X H Not surveyed. Within grading limits. Remove 150 Coast live oak 19 G F 0 25 20 20 M X H One stem topped by PG&E, Poor location. Within grading limits. Remove 151 Coast live oak 15 F-P P 25N-NE 0 20 Y X H Topped by PG&E. Sparse canopy and deadwood. Within proposed driveway Remove 152 Coast live oak 15 G F 10 15 0 0 Y X H Sided by PG&E. Within proposed driveway. Remove 153 Valley oak 20, 15 G F 10 25 30 30 M X H Somewhat lions tailed, branches elongated to S. Within grading and sewer easement. Remove 154 Valley oak 13 G G-F 10 0 20 20 Y X M- H 1' from existing gravel driveway. Trunk buried. At edge grading limits. Arborist on site for grading. Save Arborist to pull fill back from base of tree. 155 Coast live oak 11 G F 8 12 15 0 Y X H Topped by PG&E. Within proposed driveway. Remove 156 Coast live oak 9 G F 6 8 6 0 Growing up under PG&E wires. Within proposed driveway. Remove 157 Coast live oak 10 G F 10 0 10 18 Y X L Off-site. Trunk buried. 1.5' from existing gravel driveway. Grading at edge of dripline. Save Arborist to pull fill back from base of tree. 158 Chinese pistache 12 F F 15 12 0 10 M X H Partially topped. Within grading for road. Remove 159 Coast live oak 8 G F-P 12NW Y X L Off-site. Trunk buried. Sided by PG&E. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 160 Valley oak 7 G F 8 8 0 0 Y X L Off-site. Co-dominant stems at 7'. Topped by PG&E. Trunk buried. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 160 B Coast live oak 7 G F 15N-NE Y X L Off-site; not surveyed. Lean to NE. 6" NW of #160. . Grading at edge of dripline. Save 161 Iron bark euc. 11, 7 Previously removed. Suspect by PG&E (under wires) N/A 162 Coast live oak 15, 11 G P 15 15 15 15 M X L Topped by PG&E, co-dominant stems. Grading for road at edge of dripline. Save 163 Coast live oak 11 G G 6 6 6 6 Y X L Reduced by PG&E. Grading at edge of dripline Save 164 Incense cedar 15 F F 7 7 7 7 M X H Sweeping S shaped trunk. Within proposed road. Remove 165 Incense cedar Removed. N/A 166 Coast live oak 19, 20 G-F F 30 30 30 0 M X H Co-dominant stems. Moderate sycamore borer. Within grading limits. Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 7 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 166 B Siberian elm 7, 11 F-P P 18 0 0 18 M X H Not surveyed. Co-dominant stems at 2'. Within grading limits. Remove 166 C Siberian elm 9, 8, 7 P P 20 0 0 20 M X H Not surveyed. Basal sprouts; decay. Within grading limits. Remove 167 Black walnut 9, 4, 4 F F 20 0 0 20 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 168 Black walnut 8 P P 20NW Y X H Understory tree; no growth in past 14 years. Within grading limits. Remove 169 Coast live oak 20 G F 35 20 20 20 M X H Within grading limits. Remove 169 B Coast live oak 9 G F 30NW Y X H Not surveyed. Understory tree. 40° phototropic lean to NW. Within grading limits. Remove 170 Coast live oak 14 G G 8 8 8 8 Y X H Trunk buried. Within grading limits. Remove 171 Coast live oak 14 F-P F 35N-NW Y X H Ivy around base, upper branches are damaged by a fungal canker at 15'. On creek bank well. Within grading limits. Remove 171 B Coast live oak 14 G G 35NW Y X H In creek structure setback. 40° lean to NW. Within grading limits. Remove 172 Monterey pine 48 F-P F-P 30 30 30 30 OM X H 5° lean to N/W. Grading up to base of tree. Only 3-5 years of anticipated lifespan left. Remove 173 Calif. Buckeye 14, 14, 8, 8, 8, 7, 7, 5 G F 35 20 0 20 M X M- H Low branching (trunks laying on ground). Grading limits well within N/W dripline. Pull grade limits back so 15’ from trunk. Save Assuming grade limits can be adjusted. 173 B Calif. Buckeye 11, 12 G F 10 10 10 10 M L In creek structure setback. Ivy covering tree. Save 173 C Coast live oak 8 F P 25N Y X L- M Understory tree with heavy lean (trunk horizontal before correcting) to NW. Young tree with some dripline grading encroachment. Save 174 Black walnut 23 F-P F 20 20 20 25 M X H Low branching, old mistletoe in canopy; dieback. Within grade limits. Remove 175 Siberian elm 17, 17, 15 P P 20 20 20 20 M X H Tree in decline, poorly structured. Within grade limits. Remove 176 Coast redwood 30 F/F-P G 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought-stressed. Within grade limits. Remove 177 Coast redwood 26 F/F-P G 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought-stressed. Within grade limits. Remove 177 B Valley oak 11 G G 8 8 8 8 Y X H Not surveyed. Chain on trunk. Within grade limits. Remove 178 Valley oak 14, 6 G F 15 15 20 20 Y X H Lean to SW. Within grade limits. Remove 178 B Valley oak 8 G F 12 12 0 0 Y Not surveyed. Within grade limits. Remove 179 Calif. Buckeye 8, 7, 6 G G 12 12 12 12 M X H Within grade limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 8 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 180 Mulberry 18 P P 0 10 10 0 OM X H Previously topped. Within grade limits. Remove 181 Valley oak 11 F F 15NE-NW Y L Grading just outside dripline. Save 182 Valley oak 11 F F 15S Y X L- M Grading at edge of dripline. Save 183 Valley oak 13 F F 20 NE 15 0 0 Y X L- M Grading at edge of dripline. Save 184 Black walnut 8, 8, 7 P P 8 8 8 8 M X H Declining health. Within grade limits. Remove 185 Valley oak 11 F F 18 NE 10 0 0 Y X L- M S shaped trunk. Grading at edge of dripline. Save 186 Calif. Buckeye 7, 7, 6, 6, 5, 5, 5 G G 18 18 18 18 M X M Tangled with mulberry, and walnut. Grading withn dripline. Save Arborist on site during grading. 187 Mulberry 18 P P 15 15 15 15 M X H Drought stressed, tangled with buckeye. Within grading limits. Remove 188 Black walnut 9 F F 20S Y X H Competing with buckeye, recommend removal. Within grade limits. Remove 188 B Coast live oak 11 F G 12 12 12 12 Y X H Not surveyed. Within storm treatment area. Remove 188 C Coast live oak 11 G G 6 0 10 15 Y X H Not surveyed. Within storm treatment area. Remove 189 Calif. Buckeye 9, 9, 8, 7, 7, 5, 5, 5, 3, 3, 3 G G 15 20 25 20 M X L- M Grading limits at edge of dripline. Save 190 Mulberry 16 Dead Remove. 191 Coast live oak 14 G G 10 10 10 10 Y L Grade limits just outside dripline. Save 191 B Coast live oak 11, 9 F F 18NE-NW M L Not surveyed. Lean over road. Save 192 Mulberry 19 P P 8 8 8 8 OM X H Drought stressed. In decline. Within grade limits. Remove 192 A Coast live oak 17 G F 18 NE 10 10 18 NW M L In creek structure setback. Reduced by PG&E. By street, lifting asphalt curb. Save 192 B Willow 20, 20 P P 15 0 0 0 OM L Outside northeast property corner along Grayson. Topped by PG&E; sparse canopy. Recommend removal Remove 192 C Willow 24 F P 0 0 25 30 SW OM L Outside northeast property corner along Grayson. Uprooted to S. Fallen tree. Remove 193 Siberian elm 12, 12, 10, 5, 5, 4 P P 8 8 8 8 M X H Dying tree. Within grading limits Remove Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 9 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 194 Siberian elm 12, 9, 4 P P 0 15 15 15 M X H Dying tree. Within grade limits. Remove 194 B Coast live oak 9 G F 15N Y X H Not surveyed. Up against elm. Remove 195 Siberian elm 13, 4 P P 20N M X H Declining health. Within grade limits. Remove 196 Coast live oak 19 G F 20 NW 0 20 20 M L Sweeping trunk Save 197 Bush eucalyptus 10, 8, 8 Dead M L Dead/failed. Fire hazard. Remove 198 Bush eucalyptus 15, 15 P P 10N M L Dying, fire hazard. Remove 199 Blue gum euc. 50 F F-P 25 20 20 20 M L 10" branch failure to N in 2006; minor sprouting from failure. Prune for safety if targets within 50ft. Save 200 Bush eucalyptus 18, 5, 6 F P 15S M L Declining health. Recent failures. Prune for safety. Save 201 Monterey pine 24 F P 20 20 20 20 OM L Over mature tree, badly included co-dominant stems. Anticipate short life span, recommend removal. Remove 202 Monterey pine 22 P P 0 20 20 0 OM L Over mature tree, declining health. Recommend removal. Remove 203 Monterey pine Removed. N/A 204 Monterey pine 18 F P 25E M L Poorly tapered trunk; lean to E. Recommend removal. Remove 205 Monterey pine Removed. N/A 206 Calif. Buckeye 15, 15, 10, 10 G G 25 25 25 25 M L Healthy tree. Save 301 Calif. Buckeye 10, 10 G G-F 8 12 10 12 M X H Co-dominant trunks. In proposed grading. Remove. 302 Coast live oak 9 F/F-P F-P 25N- 20NE Y X H Dominated by poison oak and ivy. In proposed grading. Remove. 303 Valley oak 19 G-F F 25N M X H Corrected phototropic lean (about 20’ above grade). Slightly sparse canopy. Ivy & poison oak dominating lower trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 304 Coast live oak 20 G F 15 6 10 25 M X H Ivy climbing trunk. Canopy in upper half. In proposed grading. Remove. 305 Valley oak 19.5 F-P/P F-P 25N M X H Dead secondary stem at base, branches dead to very top. Remaining canopy sparse & stunted with deadwood. In proposed grading. Remove. 306 Valley oak 12 P P 30N M- OM X H Lower branches dead. Remaining canopy very sparse and stunted, concentrated at top of tree about 15’ N of trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 307 Coast live oak 24 G G-F 20 20 15 15 M X H Ivy climbing trunk. Trunk has slight kink to E at 6’ but has reoriented vertically. Canopy in upper half of tree. In proposed grading. Remove. Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 10 # Species DBH Health Structure Dripline N E S W Age DE CI Comments Action 308 Coast live oak 13, 16, 7 G-F F/F-P 30N M X H Multiple co-dominant trunks. Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/4. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 309 Coast live oak 11 G-F F-P 25N Y-M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/6. In proposed grading. In proposed grading. Remove. 310 Coast live oak 10 F P 0 0 8 12 Y-M X H 1/3 canopy dead, remaining branch extends to W. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 311 Coast live oak 21 F F 30N M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/3, slightly corrected lean In proposed grading. Remove. 312 Coast live oak 28 G-F F/F-P 30N M X H Phototropic lean to N, all canopy in upper 1/4. Ivy climbing trunk. In proposed grading. Remove. 313 Valley oak 9 F-P F 30NW Y X H Phototropic lean to NW, ivy. In proposed grading. Remove. Tree Encroachment Summary A total of 130 trees were inventoried. At least four additional trees (#101, 134, 203 & 205) that were shown on the survey were removed since the original site visit. • Trees that will need to be removed: #’s 103-116, 119, 123-135, 136, 139-153, 155-156, 158, 164, 166-172, 174-180, 184, 187-188c, 190, 192, 192b-195, 197, 198, 201-201, 301-313 (97 trees) • Trees to be saved that will be subjected to dripline encroachment, and will need arborist supervision during grading within driplines: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189 (17 trees) • Additional trees to be saved that will not have dripline encroachment: #’s 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 122a, 135a, 173a, 181, 191, 191b, 192a, 196, 199, 200, 266 (16 trees) Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 11 Tree Protection Recommendations (to be printed on site plans) Pre- Grading Phase • Remove trees #103-116, 119, 123-135, 136, 139-153, 155-156, 158, 164, 166-172, 174- 180, 184, 187-188c, 190, 192, 192b-195, 197, 198, 201-201, 301-313 (97 trees) • Mulch from tree removals may be spread out under the driplines of trees that will be retained, keeping at least 12” away from the trunks. • Prior to construction or grading, contractor shall install protection fencing to construct a temporary Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) around each tree or grove of trees to be saved. TPZ fencing shall encompass the driplines and be approved by the project arborist. • TPZ fencing shall remain in an upright sturdy manner from the start of grading until the completion of construction. Fencing shall not be adjusted or removed without consulting the project arborist. Grading and Construction Phase • The project arborist shall be on-site during excavation/grading within driplines, especially trees: #’s 102, 137, 138, 154, 157, 159, 160, 160b, 162, 163, 173, 173c, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189. • Should roots > 2” be encountered, arborist shall cleanly prune roots with a handsaw or sawzall, and immediately re-cover. Irrigate as necessary. • If needed, canopy pruning shall be performed by personnel certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). All pruning shall adhere to ISA and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards and Best Management Practices. Project arborist to set guidelines prior to pruning. • Should Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) encroachment be necessary, the contractor shall contact the project arborist for consultation and recommendations. • Contractor shall keep TPZs free of all construction-related materials, debris, fill soil, equipment, etc. The only acceptable material is mulch spread out beneath the trees. • Should any damage to the trees occur, the contractor shall promptly notify the project arborist to appropriately mitigate the damage. Landscaping Phase (if applicable) • The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing shall remain in place with the same restrictions until landscape contractor notifies and meets with the project arborist. • Avoid all fill work, grade changes, and trenching within driplines unless it is performed by hand, and approved by the project arborist. • Pipes shall be threaded under or through large roots without damaging them. • Contractor shall avoid trenching and grade changes within driplines. • All planting and irrigation shall be kept a minimum of 10’ away from native oaks. All irrigation within the driplines shall be targeted at specific plants, such as drip emitters or bubblers. No overhead irrigation shall occur within the driplines of native oaks. • All planting within oak driplines shall be compatible with oaks, consisting of plant material that requires little to no water after two years’ establishment. A list of oak- compatible plants can be found in a publication from the California Oak Foundation, available at: http://californiaoaks.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/04/CompatiblePlantsUnderAroundOaks.pdf Revised Arborist Report, Grayson Road May 5, 2020 (revised 10/17/22) John Traverso, BCMA Arborist 12 Thank you for the opportunity to provide this report, and please do not hesitate to contact me if there are any questions or concerns. Please see attached tree inventory plan. Sincerely, John C Traverso ISA Board Certified Master Arborist #WE0206-B ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified TCIA Certified Tree Care Safety Professional #01802 (10/17/22 Revision by Jennifer Tso Board Certified Master Arborist #WE-10270B ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified) Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC Biological Resource Analysis Addendum December 2022 ATTACHMENT C Representative Site Photos Depicting Riparian and Upland Woodlands Photo 1. Representative photo of riparian trees leaning northwards, exhibiting clear phototropism. Photo 2. Representative photo of the distinction between the upland valley oak woodland on the left (trees exhibiting upright growth form) and the riparian valley oak woodland on the right (trees exhibiting a leaning growth form, resulting from phototropic growth outwards from the dense inner riparian canopy). THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. SL General Plan Building Outlines Highways Highways Bay Area Streets General Plan SV (Single Family Residential - Very Low) SL (Single Family Residential - Low) SM (Single Family Residential - Medium) SH (Single Family Residential - High) ML (Multiple Family Residential - Low) MM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium) MH (Multiple Family Residential - High) MV (Multiple Family Residential - Very High) MS (Multiple Family Residential - Very High Special) CC (Congregate Care/Senior Housing) MO (Mobile Home) M-1 (Parker Avenue Mixed Use) M-2 (Downtown/Waterfront Rodeo Mixed Use) M-3 (Pleasant Hill BART Mixed Use) M-4 (Willow Pass Road Mixed Use) M-5 (Willow Pass Road Commercial Mixed Use) M-6 (Bay Point Residential Mixed Use) M-7 (Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Mixed Use) M-8 (Dougherty Valley Village Center Mixed Use) M-9 (Montalvin Manor Mixed Use) M-10 (Willow Pass Business Park Mixed Use) M-11 (Appian Way Mixed Use) M-12 (Triangle Area Mixed Use) M-13 (San Pablo Dam Road Mixed Use) M-14 (Heritage Mixed Use) CO (Commercial) OF (Office) BP (Business Park) LI (Light Industry) HI (Heavy Industry) AL, OIBA (Agricultural Lands & Off Island Bonus Area) CR (Commercial Recreation) ACO (Airport Commercial) LF (Landfill) PS (Public/Semi-Public) PR (Parks and Recreation) OS (Open Space) AL (Agricultural Lands) AC (Agricultural Core) DR (Delta Recreation) Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. R-15 Zoning Building Outlines Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Zoning R-6 (Single Family Residential) R-6, -FH -UE (Flood Hazard and Animal Exclusion) R-6 -SD-1 (Slope Density Hillside Development) R-6 -TOV -K (Tree Obstruction and Kensington) R-6, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-6 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) R-7 (Single Family Residential) R-7 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) R-10 (Single Family Residential) R-10, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-12 (Single Family Residential) R-15 (Single Family Residential) R-20 (Single Family Residential) R-20, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-40 (Single Family Residential) R-40, -FH -UE (Flood Hazard and Animal Exclusion) R-40, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) R-65 (Single Family Residential) R-100 (Single Family Residential) D-1 (Two Family Residential) D-1 -T (Transitional Combining District) D-1, -UE (Urban Farm Animal Exclusion) M-12 (Multiple Family Residential) M-12 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) M-17 (Multiple Family Residential) M-29 (Multiple Family Residential) F-R (Forestry Recreational) F-R -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) F-1 (Water Recreational) F-1 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) A-2 (General Agriculture) A-2, -BS (Boat Storage Combining District) A-2, -BS -SG (Boat Storage and Solar Energy Generation) A-2 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District) A-2, -FH -SG (Flood Hazard and Solar Energy Generation) A-2 -SD-1 (Slope Density Hillside Development) A-2, -SG (Solar Energy Generation Combining District) A-2 -X (Railroad Corridor Combining District) A-3 (Heavy Agriculture) A-3 -BS (Boat Storage Combining District) Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS Legend 1:2,257 Notes0.10.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0.1 0 Miles WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Aerial Building Outlines Maintained Roads City Limits Unincorporated Highways Highways Bay Area Streets Maintained Roads Board of Supervisors' Districts Water Bodies County Boundary Bay Area Counties Assessment Parcels Aerials 2019 Red: Band_1 Green: Band_2 Blue: Band_3 World Imagery Low Resolution 15m Imagery High Resolution 60cm Imagery High Resolution 30cm Imagery Citations September 29, 2023 Joseph Lawlor, Senior Planner Contra Costa County 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94526 Via email RE: Conditions of Project Approval # 3, 42, 54, 59, 60 and 66: 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill; County File: #CDSD20-09581 Dear Mr. Lawlor: This letter requests to modify six conditions of approval (3, 42, 59, 60 and 66) contained in the Zoning Administrator Resolution regarding #CDSD20-9531. Condition of Approval 3 and 42: The condition of approval list the requested waivers, unfortunately it omits the requested side yard setback of 5’ minimum and 15’ aggregate that was requested as part of the Density Bonus request and Project Description. The side yard setback deviation is necessary to construct the project as designed. Condition of Approval 54 : The condition of approval states: “The Applicant shall construct frontage improvements along Grayson Road in accordance with the recommendations of the City of Pleasant Hill. The applicant will need to demonstrate that the City of Pleasant Hill approves of the frontage improvements proposed under this project”. The County is required to provide one or more “incentives” or “concessions” to each project that qualifies for a density bonus. A concession or incentive is defined as a reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code or other regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. The requested Concession is Not Completing Frontage Improvements (including the aerial utilities) because the frontage improvements would be very expensive, not connect to any sidewalks in either direction for over 1,000 feet, and adequate street width exists along the project frontage. Condition of approval 54 nullifies the concessions request and gives the authority to the City of Pleasant Hill in violation of Density Bonus Law. In addition, City and Counties are not allowed to divest governmental power to other agencies (please see Alameda County Land Use Assn. v. City of Hayward (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 1716). This Condition of Approval divests the County’s Authority by adjudicating the requested Concession to the City of Pleasant Hill . For these reasons, condition of approval #54 should be struck entirely. Condition of Approval 59 : The condition of approval states: “Applicant shall provide sight distance at the private road intersection with Grayson Road for a design speed of 45 miles per hour.” The posted speed limit of Grayson Road is 35 mile per hour. Department of Public Works as part of the project status review requested a Site Distance Exhibit. On June 8, 2020, we provided a Site Distance Exhibit which demonstrated adequate site distance, given the 35MPH speed limit. On December 17, 2020, the County found the project complete and provided no additional comments regarding the submitted Site Distance Exhibit. Please revise the condition of approval to be consistent with the material previously requested and provided to the Public Works Department, consistent with the site distance requirements for the posted 35 MPH speed limit. Condition of Approval 60 : The condition of approval states: Per the Vesting Tentative Map, Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system to current County private road standards with a minimum pavement width of 28 feet, with 4.5-foot sidewalk (measured from the face of curb) within a minimum 42-foot access easement”. The actual easement width shown on the Tentative Map is 32 feet. Please correct the reference to read: 32-foot access easement. Condition of Approval 66 : The condition of approval states: “The Applicant shall underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities, including those along the frontage of Grayson Road…” As mentioned above the requested concession was “not completing frontage improvements” including the aerial utilities. Given the design of the existing overhead utilities, it would very difficult to underground the utilities, because they cross Grayson Road and an acute angle and only one pole is located near the frontage of the property. Undergrounding the overhead utilities would be direct conflict with the Density Bonus and would conflict with the requested Concession. Please see the attached Joint Trench plan for additional information. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding these requests. You may contact me at 925-683-5493 at your convenience or at andy@calibrventures.com. Sincerely, Andy Byde Partner Cc: Kellen O’Connor Public Works 10 8 1 2 GRAYSON R O A D BUTTNER ROADAT-20' M 231' M M2-18' M2-104' M2-23' M 2 - 4 9 ' M2-24' M2-22' M2-22' M2-53' M2-14'A1-60'152'AD1-37' M2-5' STUB 36"x 52" PAD MOUNTTRANSFORMERT C C CT24"x 36" AT&T BOX 24"x 36" COMCAST BOX 17"x30"x26" PG&E SECONDARY BOX 24"x 36 " COMCAST BOX24"x 36" COMCAST BOX24"x 36" AT&T BOX24"x 36" COMCAST BOXCM2-39'GOLF LINKS STFRONT17"x30"x26" PG&E SECONDARY BOX 53'x 5'x 3'6" (3'9"x 5'9" O.D.) PG&E PRIMARY SPLICE VAULT 17"x30"x26" PG&E SECONDARY BOXM2-3' STUB M2-3' STUB T U-105' H1-11' F1-38' V-8' M2-5' STUB M2-5' STUB M2-5' STUB M2-5' STUB 33.5'20' 28' 28' 9 67 5 4 3 2E2E2E2E 2E 17"x30"x26" PG&E SECONDARY BOX17"x30"x26" PG&E SECONDARY BOX10' 10' 47.16' 10' 10' 10' 81.9471' 10' 10'10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10.8' 10' 5.4819' 18" SECTION 'H1' 11 LF36" NATIVE36" PAVEDP 45" NATIVE45" PAVED18" SECTION 'V' 8 LF24" NATIVE30" PAVED30" NATIVE36" PAVEDC 18" SECTION 'F1' 38 LF24" NATIVE30" PAVEDP T 12"56" PAVED50" NATIVE24" 12" SECTION 'M' 231 LF24" NATIVE30" PAVED7" CT 6" S 54" NATIVE60" PAVEDG 18" SECTION 'U' 105 LF24" NATIVE30" PAVED32" NATIVE38" PAVEDT DESCRIPTIONSHEET NO. REVISION NUMBER: SHEET OFREVDATEMDCI JOB#:LAST MODIFIED:SCALE:DESIGNED BY:MDCI PM:PLOT DATE:CHECKED BY:UTILITY DESIGN & CONSULTING - APPLICANT DESIGN - STREET LIGHTINGP.O. BOX 737ALAMO, CA 94507PHONE: 925-820-8502 - FAX: 925-820-8407MILLENNIUMDESIGN & CONSULTING, INC.CAILBR VENTURES1024 & 1026 GRAYSON ROADPLEASANT HILL CALIFORNIAJOINT TRENCH CONCEPTUAL COMPOSITE21-1302AGNKAG1"=30'7-12-23JTC1 1 1 0 7-12-23 NOTE: NOTE: C=CABLE TV JOINT UTILITY TRENCH SECTION LEGEND TELEPHONET= (DISTRIBUTION) SECONDARY GAS PRIMARY G= S= P= P CT STREET S G (SERVICE) S CT G STREET NOTE: NORTH AT&T (TYPICAL) 3) CONTRACTOR TO INCLUDE COST OF TRANSITIONS IN VAULT TRENCH TRANSITION DETAIL TO VAULTS AS REQUIRED BY EACH UTILITY. 1) CONTRACTOR TO EXCAVATE TRANSITIONS FROM MAIN-LINE TRENCH 2) TRANSITIONS NOT SHOWN ON COMPOSITE DRAWING FOR CLARITY. EXCAVATION COST. P.G.& E.CATV BEND IS 60' RADIUS WITH AN ANGLE OF 10°. USE 2-5 COUPLINGS WITH 1-5' CONDUIT SECTION FOR EACH BEND SHOWN. BEND IS 30' RADIUS WITH AN ANGLE OF 15°. USE 3-5 COUPLINGS WITH 2-2 1/2' CONDUIT SECTIONS FOR EACH BEND SHOWN. TYPICAL P.G.&E. PRIMARY BOX EXCAVATION USING CONDUIT "A" BE N D "A" BEND "B" BEND 3' x 5' PRIMARY BOX SIZE 4'-6" x 8'-6" 3' x 5' 4'-6" x 8'-6" PRIMARY BOX SIZE X "B" BE N D DISTANCE (when conduit enters "A") DISTANCE (when conduit enters "B") 24'5'7' "Y""X""Z" "Y""X" 32' 32' "Z" 7' 5' 11' 7' 24'7'11' JOINT TRENCH Y X Z * THESE SECTIONS MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN SECONDARY SECTION W J V U L O N M K T S R Q P I G* F* E* D* H* C* B* A* TG SC P OTHER X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X GOVERNING AGENCIES' STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS JOINT TRENCH CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH LOCAL MINIMUM BACKFILL REQUIREMENTS 18" MIN 12" DISTRIBUTION24" NATIVE30" PAVEDP 3" MIN CT 6" STREET S 54" NATIVE60" PAVEDG SL12"5" 5" 7" 7" 18" MIN SERVICE S 6" MIN CT G 39" NATIVE45" PAVED3" 4" 12"24" PAVED18" NATIVE3 6 1.5 - - 1-12 6- SL STREET LIGHT - SEE NOTE 5 ELECTRIC PRIMARY ELECTRIC SECONDARY CATV TELEPHONE (DIRECT BURY) TELEPHONE (DUCT) (GAS) SEE NOTES 4,7, & 13 P S C T T G G PSTCT MINIMUM SEPARATION AND CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS (INCHES) UTILITY TYPELBL FE*(FOREIGN ELEC SOURCES, SL NON PG&E*) SEE NOTE 5 6 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12**12** 12 12 12 11 1 1 1 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 3 3 3 3 1.5 1.5 1.5 6 12**12 *MUST BE CONSIDERED A 'UTILITY' AS DEFINED IN UTILITY STANDARD S5453, "JOINT TRENCH." **FOR EXCEPTIONS, REFER TO G.O. 128 RULE, SECTION B, ITEMS (1) AND (2). * 12" 6" 12" CT SG6"P COVER CANNOT BE MAINTAINED, MIN. COVER REQUIRED. IF MIN. P.G.&E. AND CITY INSPECTOR TO DETERMINE METHOD OF CROSSING. * = WIDTH PER SIZE & NUMBER OF EACH UTILITY. 12" MIN.12" MIN. IN TRACT JOINT TRENCH OVER WATER & S.S. & S.D. 1' PER FIELD CONDITIONS PER UTILITY COMPANYPER UTILITY COMPANY PROPOSED GRADE IN TRACT JOINT TRENCH UNDER WATER & S.S. & S.D.* 6"6" 12"12" T C SG P OR S.S. OR W S.D. S.D. OR S.S. OR W 12" MIN.12" MIN. PROPOSED GRADE PER FIELD CONDITIONS 30" COVER30" COVER PER UTILITY COMPANYPER UTILITY COMPANY 1' SP TCG SP TCG S P GCT PS GCT PLANNING FOR AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION CONSULT WITH PG&E ENGINEERING AND -PRELIMINARY PLANS- NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PLEASE VERIFY THE SERVICE POINTS ON THIS PLAN MATCH YOUR CURRENT DESIGN. IF THERE ARE DISCREPANCIES, PLEASE CONTACT THE PROJECT MANAGER IN OUR OFFICE @ 925-820-8502 CONSTRUCTION NOTE: DO NOT BURY OR ENCASE CONDUIT, SUBSTRUCTURES OR GROUNDING WITHOUT PG&E INSPECTION TRENCH SECTIONS SHOW UTILITY OCCUPANCY ONLY. SIZE AND QUANTITY OF CONDUITS NOT SHOWN. SECTION 'A1' 60 LF 30" 12"24" NATIVE30" PAVED7" P CT 6"54" NATIVE60" PAVEDG 24" SECTION 'D1' 37 LF24" NATIVE30" PAVEDP CT 12"56" PAVED50" NATIVE30" 12" SECTION 'A' 152 LF24" NATIVE30" PAVED7" P 3" CT 6" S 54" NATIVE60" PAVEDG 18" SECTION 'M2' (SERVICE) 31 LF (STUBS)24" NATIVE30" PAVEDS 6" CT 12" G 45" NATIVE51" PAVED368 LF (COMPLETIONS) 18" SECTION 'T' 20 LF24" NATIVE30" PAVED30" NATIVE36" PAVEDG SYMBOL LEGEND PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION TRENCH GAS TIE-IN PIT (1) STUB (MAINLINE TRENCH) PROPOSED SERVICE TRENCH STUB (SERVICE TRENCH) EXISTING OVERHEAD LINESOH 17"x 30"x26" PG&E SECONDARY BOX (5)2E 24"X 30" COMCAST CATV SPLICE BOX (4)C 24"X 30" AT&T TELEPHONE BOX (2)T 36"x 52" PG&E PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMER (1) EX. UTILITY POLE *M2-COMP *M2-STUB M D1 A1 A T ALL FIELD CHANGES REQUIRE PRIOR APPROVAL FROM: UTILITY CONTACT PERSON TELEPHONE PG&E REP AT&T SEFNCO TOSIN LADEINDE TERRY DAUGHTON SOPHARL UNG 415-302-4820 925-328-6821 925-290-9073 H1 F1 U V UTILITY POLE P.U.E. ADDITIONAL NOTES: CONSTRUCTION/INSTALLATION RESPONSIBILITY TABLE *ELEC SUBSTRUCTURES INCLUDING BOXES/PADS/CONDUIT *ELEC FACILITIES INCLUDING TRANSFORMERS/SWITCHES/WIRE *GAS PIPE/MATERIALS/RISERS P.G.&E *APPLICANT WILL TRENCH & BACKFILL ALL. *PG&E WILL MAKE ALL "HOT" TIE-INS & SET ALL METERS. *APPLICANT WILL INSTALL ALL TELEPHONE BOXES & CONDUIT. *TELEPHONE COMPANY WILL INSTALL ALL TELEPHONE WIRE. *INSTALLATION OF CATV BOXES & CONDUIT BY CATV, OR APPLICANT, TO BE DETERMINED AT THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING. IF BY APPLICANT, CATV COMPANY TO DELIVER SUBSTRUCTURE MATERIAL TO THE JOBSITE. JT CONTRACTOR & CATV COMPANY TO COORDINATE DELIVERY. DRY UTILITY (JOINT TRENCH) INSTALLATION FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL BE: FULL APPLICANT INSTALL / SHARED INSTALL APPLICANT ACCESS DRIVE TYPICAL SECTION SUBSTRUCTURES RECAP 17"x 30"x26" SECONDARY BOX 24"X 30" CATV SPLICE BOXC 24"X 30" TELEPHONE BOX 36"x 52" PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMER SUBSTRUCTURE TOTAL COMPANY TRENCH AGENT COMCAST AT&T PG&E PG&E 4 5 1 2 BACKFILL SURFACE GRAVELT 2E PG&E15'x5' GAS BELLHOLE SANDSPREADHAULDIRTPVMTCONCOTHER152 LF 60 LF 37 LF 231 LF 31 LF 368 LF 20 LF 38 LF 11 LF 105 LF 8 LF TG SC P OTHER TRENCH SECTION XX XX X INDICATES SPECIFIC UTILITIES IN THE TRENCH JOINT TRENCH RECAP XX X X X X X X X X XX XX XX XX XX XX X X X DIST OR SERVICE TRENCH SIZE BACKFILL SURFACE FOOTAGE W" x D" 30" x 54" 30" x 54" 24" x 50" 18" x 50" 18" x 45" 24" x 54" 18" x 45" 18" x 45" 18" x 30" 18" x 32" 18" x 30"4"SHADEADDIT'NAL GRAVELSPREADDIRTPVMTCONCOTHERHAULREQ'DDISTSVC-FSVC-PX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X *SERVICE TRENCH ON PRIVATE PROPERTY NOT INCLUDED APPLICANT APPLICANT APPLICANT APPLICANT APPLICANT X X X X X X X X X X NOTE: FOR CLARITY PURPOSES, SOME BOXES AND VAULTS MAY APPEAR LARGER THAN ACTUAL SIZE 3'x 5'x 3'6" PRIMARY ELECTRIC VAULT (1)5 3'X 5'X 3'6" PRIMARY VAULT 5 PG&E1 APPLICANT X X ESMT/PUE ESMT SETBACK CBVR-58090\2839029.1 1331 N. California Blvd. Suite 600 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 T 925 935 9400 F 925 933 4126 www.msrlegal.com Bryan W. Wenter Direct Dial: 925 941 3268 bryan.wenter@msrlegal.com Offices: Walnut Creek / San Francisco / Newport Beach October 2, 2023 VIA E-MAIL County Zoning Administrator Department of Conservation and Development c/o William R. Nelson Contra Costa County 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Email: Will.Nelson@dcd.cccounty.us Re: 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill; CDSD20-09531 and 3180 Walnut Boulevard, Walnut Creek; CDSD21-09581_______________ Dear Mr. Nelson: This firm represents Calibr Ventures in connection with the above-referenced housing development projects being processed in unincorporated Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek, both of which are scheduled for approval hearings today. As you know, the projects are subject to neighborhood opposition, the kind of opposition regularly levied against such infill housing projects. We write to encourage you to conduct the hearings for both of these projects today, without further delay, regardless of this opposition and regardless of any last minute comments the opposition has made. Both projects are consistent with the County’s applicable, objective land use regulations, and there is no evidence in the record, much less a preponderance of the evidence, that either project would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health or safety. Accordingly, under the Housing Accountability Act (Gov. Code § 65589.5) and Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code §§ 65915-65918) the County will be required to approve both projects without imposing conditions that negatively impact the ability of the projects to provide housing (Gov. Code § 65589.3(h)(7))— regardless of any opposition—as there is no lawful way to disapprove either (Gov. Code § 65589.5(j)(1) and Gov. Code §§ 65915(d)(1) and 65915(e)(1)). As you also know, the applications for both projects were deemed complete long ago. In the case of Grayson Road, the application was deemed complete County Zoning Administrator October 2, 2023 Page 2 CBVR-58090\2839029.1 December 17, 2020, and in the case of Walnut Boulevard, the application was deemed complete July 27, 2022. Given that the California Environmental Quality Act requires the completion and approval of Mitigated Negative Declarations within 180 days of the date the application was deemed complete (14. Cal. Code Regs. § 15107), these projects are already substantially delayed and may not be delayed further. For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that you conduct both public hearings today and that you approve the projects, as correctly recommended by each project planner. Sincerely, MILLER STARR REGALIA Bryan W. Wenter Bryan W. Wenter, AICP BWW cc: Dominique Vogelpohl, Project Planner Joseph W. Lawlor, AICP Andy Byde, Partner October 1, 2023 Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator planninghearing@dcd.cccounty.us Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP joseph.Lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us RE: CDSD20-009531 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Public Hearing Comments My comments are much briefer and less complete than I would have liked due to the unacceptably short period of time the public was given to respond to the County’s lengthy staff report, including the County’s response to my comments. The staff report was not made available to the public until the afternoon of Thursday, September 28th, four days before the public hearing, with two of those days being a weekend. It can be reasonably seen that this short time frame for such a complex and controversial project provides insufficient time to review and respond to the staff report. Despite my repeated requests to obtain the staff report when the notice of public hearing was sent to me, my request was continually denied with no explanation except that the County is not required by ordinance to provide the staff report any sooner than 96 hours before the hearing. Despite there being no prohibition in the ordinance preventing the County from providing the staff report sooner, the staff report was withheld from me until the agenda was emailed to me at 2:00 on October 28th. Was a notice of public hearing released before all project materials such as the staff report were completed and ready for public review, or was the County doing what they could to reduce the amount of time the public had to review the staff report in order to minimize public input? Neither of these options is acceptable. The public has simply not had enough time to fully review and respond to the information in the staff report, and thus this hearing should be continued to a future date that will provide sufficient time to thoroughly review and digest all project materials. Regarding the appropriateness of this hearing, why is this project being advertised as a minor subdivision? Minor subdivisions are universally deﬁned as containing 4 or fewer lots, a deﬁnition contained in the County’s zoning ordinances. This project contains 10 lots. This is a signiﬁcant error, and should result in the hearing being continued to a future date where it can be properly agendized. However, there are additional concerns that impact this hearing. This project has 10 lots which is a major subdivision and thus should be heard by the Planning Commission. A Zoning Administrator hearing is inappropriate not only due to the project being a major subdivision, but also because the project is steeped in controversy as evidenced by neighborhood concerns expressed through phone calls, emails, and submitted comments. A Planning Commission public hearing in the future with a staff report available at least when the public hearing notice is released is the appropriate legal path for this project. In the event the County chooses to continue with what would appear to be an inappropriate hearing, I am providing comments herein on the project. October 1, 2023 October 2, 2023 Public Hearing Comments CDSD20-009531 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Page of 2 5 I am providing my original CEQA comment letter as an attachment to this letter, which together serve as my comment letter for purposes of this hearing, since an inadequate amount of time was provided to fully respond to all the County’s responses to my comments and other issues addressed in the staff report. While the County has provided responses to my concerns, those responses in most cases appear to simply restate information from the initial study that was insufficient to address my concern. The numerous concerns detailed in my CEQA comment letter remain valid and inadequately addressed by the CEQA document and the County’s response to my comments, with minor exceptions. Regarding the County’s response to what they identify as my comment #1, Jeanne Shikany (my mother who lives in the neighborhood adjacent to this subdivision) did not receive a notice of the circulation of the revised MND, despite what the staff report response indicates. I did receive a notice. The response says her receipt of the notice is evidenced by her response, but she did not respond to the notice, I did; I responded to the notice I received. The County did not fulﬁll their noticing requirements for the MND circulation because they did not provide notice to my mother, despite her request to receive notices. Further, regarding County response to what the County identiﬁes as my comment #2, forcing the public reviewing an IS/MND to have to submit a request for the reports that are legally part of the MND is not only bad public policy, it constitutes an insufficient CEQA circulation since the entire IS/MND was not circulated or made readily available. This project has had several issues with technical CEQA compliance as described in my early emails to Mr. Lawlor. The County responded to one of my comments stating that the developer considered neighborhood concerns when designing the project. If this were the case, this project would look signiﬁcantly different than it currently does. There is no change in the project plans or project description from the initial IS/MND circulation, as evidenced by the date on the plans attached to this staff report. The County has added one additional requirement in regard to addressing noise impacts raised by the neighborhood, but that is the only change to the project that can be directly attributed to the neighborhood comments. Other changes to biological impacts mitigation were the result of revised biological assessments conducted in response to California Department of Fish and Wildlife comments, according to County staff. While these changes addressed some neighborhood concerns, they were not changes provided by the developer in response to those concerns. The developer of this project has made no attempt to contact concerned neighbors or address neighborhood concerns directly. The project mitigation is inadequate in many instances as described in my attached CEQA comments. One example of inadequate analysis and mitigation concerns the longterm impacts to wildlife and their habitat. One mitigation measure that attempts to address this impact is a requirement to replant 158 trees in-kind and onsite “to the extent practicable,” when there is no place to plant those trees since the only area remaining undeveloped with roads, homes, residential yards or a detention basin, is the riparian corridor that should not be a replanting area. The tree planting mitigation relies on the requirement for a landscaping plan, but a landscaping plan does not miraculously create additional land area for tree planting and reestablishment of critical wildlife habitat being permanently destroyed by this project. This mitigation as proposed is October 1, 2023 October 2, 2023 Public Hearing Comments CDSD20-009531 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Page of 3 5 unattainable and therefore legally inadequate pursuant to CEQA, unless of course the County determines replanting is not “practicable” and does not require the replanting, thereby leaving this signiﬁcant impact unmitigated. Signiﬁcant environmental wildlife and habitat impacts remain, despite proposed mitigation for this project such as the mitigation to address habitat loss through tree replanting, as further detailed in my CEQA comments. Thus, adoption of the MND and MMRP cannot legally occur, and the project cannot be approved. A reduction in the number of lots would go a long way in addressing the wildlife, habitat loss, and other remaining signiﬁcant impacts of this project. The staff report contains project plans and elevations prepared by the architect WHA that are only now being provided to the public for the ﬁrst time; they were not included in either circulated IS/ MND. These plans clearly show that six homes include ADUs. The County is apparently not even aware that they are approving a project with 6 ADUs in addition to 10 single family homes, as the County’s responses to my and other’s concerns regarding ADUs consistently state that there will be no ADUs. This means that none of the traffic calculations considered the additional traffic from these ADUs, which needs to be remedied. Considering the virtual elimination of single family residential zoning by the exceptionally permissive stance of the state in regard to ADUs, together with the very large size of the proposed homes, traffic and parking needs should have assumed ADUs could be built on all lots. The plans from WHA reveal the homes to be built were designed without any consideration for the neighborhood within which they will be located. The relatively rural location of this subdivision within the County is not comprised of the type of homes shown on the plans. These homes are very large two-story square boxes that will be very close together, forming an imposing mass of development where this type of development does not currently exist. It is the County’s job to protect the environment and community character of Contra Costa County, which is not what the County would be accomplishing by approving this project. The County continues to cite state law as the justiﬁcation for all the concessions and waivers being awarded to the developer of this subdivision. The concessions given to the developer by the County on behalf of the public clearly provide substantial ﬁnancial gains for the developer that likely far outweigh his costs of providing one moderate income home. In contrast, these waivers and concession will result in a ﬁnancial, environmental, community character, and public safety losses for the community. This is not an equatable tradeoff with little if any notable gain to the public from the one moderate income home. The waivers and concessions simply cannot be found to be in the public interest, considering the resulting impacts. The inclusion of one single moderate income home should not be utilized as a tool to substantially alter what would normally be allowed in a subdivision, but that appears to be what is happening here. A single moderate income home on the smallest lot in the worst location in the subdivision is not a comparable or signiﬁcant gain for the public nor a signiﬁcant ﬁnancial loss to the developer when considering the developer’s ﬁnancial gains and the publics losses resulting from the concessions and waivers. Additionally, state law certainly did not envision allowing a housing project with signiﬁcant environmental and community impacts for the sake of this one moderate income home. October 1, 2023 October 2, 2023 Public Hearing Comments CDSD20-009531 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Page of 4 5 Regarding the concession to eliminate complete frontage improvements on Grayson Road, most speciﬁcally elimination of sidewalks and construction of asphalt curbs which will not have longevity, the developer does not want to construct these improvements because of a claim it is too expensive, with no justiﬁcation provided regarding what constitutes ‘too expensive.’ When the County ﬁnally decides sidewalks are needed (perhaps when someone is hit, which is more likely to occur with the addition of 10 homes and at least 6 ADUs to an already unsafe pedestrian situation), the public will bear the cost. If the County is going to actually give the developer the ﬁnancial beneﬁt of eliminating full frontage improvements on Grayson because of expense and because there is no sidewalk to connect to currently, there should at least be a sidewalk agreement that would encumber each and every lot in this subdivision, requiring them to pay the cost for curb, gutter and sidewalk when it is required at some point in the future. The public should not have to foot the bill for this substantial ﬁnancial beneﬁt to this developer. Again, a reduction in the number of lots could help justify the requested concession, but should still require a sidewalk agreement. As provided in other comments contained in my letter, the consistency of this project with State Density Bonus Law is questionable. For example, the moderate income lot is not what is driving the need for modiﬁcations to zoning requirements such as lot size and setbacks. Nine lots (the number of lots without the moderate income lot) would not ﬁt on this property while meeting all zoning requirements. The County did not adequately respond to my comment that the base number of lots (9) could not be created without the granting of a variance which in the case of a subdivision, would be illegal. In other words, even without the inclusion of the moderate income residence, a 9-lot subdivision could not meet county density and zoning requirements. It is therefore clear that the moderate income home is not what is driving the need for lot size and setback waivers. The county dismissed my comment by stating: The Density Bonus Law allows waivers and concessions to R-15 zoning standards because an increased density often physically precludes a project from following all design standards for its land use and zoning designations. However, it is not the increased density from the affordable home, which I believe is what the density bonus law is speaking to, that is requiring these waivers since there is no way to ﬁt 9 claimed base lots on this property without these waivers. So again, how can the County ﬁnd that waivers are required to provide for the affordable home when they are clearly not, as they would be required without the affordable home (ie. they would be required for 9 lots). This would also point to not only eliminating the requested waivers, but calls into question the base lot calculation of 9 lots when determining the maximum density allowed for this property. The County’s inclusion of undevelopable or unusable area in net acreage calculations used to determine the base number of lots is yet another issue that should be reconsidered. These are examples of the County “standing on their head” to fulﬁll the developer’s desire to construct this unacceptably dense development, thereby facilitating negative community and environmental impacts. Lighting impacts have been an ongoing concern for the neighbors adjacent to this project, and are also a biological concern. A mitigation measure provides that lighting will be limited to the subject property, a statement that the staff report continuously points to when addressing neighborhood lighting concerns. However, the riparian corridor is located on the subject property, meaning that the mitigation measure would not restrict light entering the riparian corridor. This mitigation needs October 1, 2023 October 2, 2023 Public Hearing Comments CDSD20-009531 Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Page of 5 5 to be revised to indicate that lighting will be restricted to only the developed portions of the project site, excluding the detention basin which should also not be impacted by light. The staff report states in response to my comment regarding changes in the hours of operations in the section on noise, that the project would include standard conditions of approval that would limit the construction to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. While that condition is included, the MMRP still states that the construction contractor shall limit noise producing construction activities to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturday. This conﬂicts with the condition of approval, so this conﬂict needs to be rectiﬁed. The ﬁndings and conditions of approval in the staff report refer to this subdivision as a parcel map in numerous places. However, it it is not a parcel map subdivision; it is a ﬁnal map subdivision due to the number of lots. The ﬁndings and conditions of approval must be revised to accurately reference the subdivision prior to adoption. This letter contains just some of the issues that I have brought forward in my attached CEQA comments, plus contains some additional concerns. As noted above, the time provided by the County to review the staff report was woefully inadequate, and I simply ran out of time to provide a more thorough response to the staff report. No decisions should be made on this project until additional time is provided to allow a more thorough review of the staff report by the public, as well as additional time to allow the zoning administrator to thoroughly review comments received at the October 2nd hearing if it is held despite the issues raised at the beginning of this letter. More time should be provided for public review of the staff report for any future public hearings. What the County is doing to the community with this project is unacceptable. This is a poorly designed project that, as currently proposed for approval, will have detrimental impacts to the environment and the community. As the County should be well aware, subdivision is a privilege, not a right. Yet, it appears that the County is reaching to the limits everywhere it believes it can in order to facilitate this inappropriately dense subdivision that has signiﬁcant unmitigated impacts to the natural and developed environment, is providing inadequate road improvements, and is very obviously out of character with its surroundings, while giving the developer everything he is asking for and dismissing legitimate community concerns, leaving the community to ultimately pay the price for the inadequacies of this project the County is proposing to approve, all of which is truly unfortunate. Sincerely, Lisa D. Shikany Attachment: Grayson Road MND comments dated 4-24-23 January 3 , 2024 Re: Calibr Venture’s Response to Appeal of CDSR 20-09531 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road Pleasant Hill, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus, and Mitigated Negative Declaration Dear Honorable Members of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission: Calibr Ventures LLC ("Applicant") respectfully urges you to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and reject the appeal filed by the Mohawk and Iroquois Dr Neighborhood ("Appellant") challenging the approvals of the proposed 10-unit subdivision ("Project") located at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road ("Project Site”). The Applicant vigorously disagrees with the Appellant's contention that the project is a violation of State Density Bonus law or will result in unmitigated impacts on the environment. Below is background information on the Project, as well as responses to the Appellant's assertions, which demonstrate why the Planning Commission should reject the Appellant’s appeal. Project History Applicant Calibr Ventures is the developer of the Grayson Road Project, a 10 lot subdivision and Density Bonus request located at 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, in unincorporated Pleasant Hill. The Project has a Single-Family Residential-Low Density (SL) General Plan land use designation, which objectively allows a range of 1.0 and 2.9 single-family units per net acre, is zoned R-15 (Single-Family Residential) and is located in an R-15 (Single Family Residential 15,000 square foot minimum lot size) zone. As discussed more fully below, the Project is a “housing development project” and it protected by the provisions of the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”) and Density Bonus Law (“DBL”). As noted above, the Project contemplates construction of 10 single-family homes, including one unit that will be restricted for a moderate-income household. Because it includes 10% moderate-income units, the Project is eligible for a density bonus and related incentives and concessions and waivers or reductions of development standards pursuant to the DBL set forth in Government Code section 65915 and implemented by section 922-2.208 of the ordinance code of Contra Costa County. In 2008, the County approved the “Former Project,” a 5-lot Tentative Map and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project Site (see SD 06-9158). The Former Project never proceeded to a Final Map. The Project application for the Calibr Ventures 10-lot Tentative Map was submitted to the County in January of 2020. The application was deemed complete in December of 2020. In May of 2022, the County published and mailed a notice of Public Review and Notice to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Nextdoor post from the neighborhood articulated concern about the Project: Integral Consulting Inc. 433 Visitacion Avenue Brisbane, CA 94005 telephone: 925-895-4302 www.integral-corp.com MEMORANDUM To: Andy Byde, Calibr Ventures From: Sadie McGarvey, Integral Consulting Inc. Date: January 3, 2024 Subject: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project – Response to California Wildlife Foundation Comment Letter This memo has been prepared to respond to comments presented in the December 20, 2023 comment letter from the California Wildlife Foundation (CWF) regarding the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California. Responses were developed using information presented within the IS/MND circulated by Contra Costa County on March 24, 2023, as well as the Biological Resource Analysis Addendum for the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project, Contra Costa County, California (prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC, dated December 2022) (BRA Addendum), and the Response to Comments letter (RTC) provided to Joseph Lawlor of Contra Costa County on July 31, 2023. Comments Comment 1: While the BRA Addendum identifies 1.18 acres of the site as Valley Oak Woodland (S3), the mitigation of this Sensitive Natural Community is insufficient. The analysis is deficient in that it does not assess canopy cover and absolute percentages in upland areas or covering the channel of Grayson Creek. Response 1: The BRA Addendum provides an analysis of acreage of valley oak woodland to be impacted by the proposed Project (1.18 acre), as well as the number of trees within the valley oak woodland proposed for removal as a result of Project activities (32 native and 8 non-native). While the arborist report did not include an assessment of canopy cover or “absolute percentages” for the onsite trees, this is not a requirement for tree assessments and is not standard practice for determining health and vigor of trees, or calculating impacts to onsite trees. Further, it is unclear what “absolute percentages” refers to as it is not defined in either the CDFW comment letter from which it was copied, or the CWF letter. Finally, an assessment of canopy in upland areas cover the channel of Grayson Creek is not necessary as no trees that provide canopy cover over Grayson Creek Response to CWF Comments January 3, 2024 will be impacted as part of Project activities (i.e., they are outside of the development footprint). The sufficiency of the mitigation for impacts to valley oak woodland (as a Sensitive Natural Community) is further addressed in RTC Response to CDFW-3. In summary, mitigation for trees removed will occur in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. This is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice, and there is no ecological or other basis for concluding that this tree replanting is inadequate. Comment 2: Further, the Sensitive Natural Communities page of the CDFW website notes: “Natural Communities with ranks of S1-S3 are considered Sensitive Natural Communities to be addressed in the environmental review processes of CEQA and its equivalents.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) mandates completion of an Environmental Impact Report if a project would threaten to eliminate a plant community. The BRA Addendum does not include the rigorous analysis of an EIR. Instead, it simply identifies approximately 1.18 acres of Valley Oak Woodland that the proposed project would remove, provides a revised mitigation measure that is acknowledged as less protective than what CDFW recommends, and argues that the proposed mitigation aligns with the county’s Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. Response 2: Implementation of the Project would not result in elimination of existing plant communities - Mitigation Measures Biology-2 and Biology-7 require on-site replacement of trees removed and planting of Valley Oak Woodland species within all on-site undeveloped areas. This is further discussed in RTC Response to CDFW-3 and SHIKANY- 27. Comment 3: Contra Costa County’s tree protections do not override state protections for sensitive natural communities. The beginning of CDFW’s letter clearly states that they serve as “… a Trustee Agency with responsibility under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15386 for commenting on projects that could impact fish, plant, and wildlife resources.” Should the Grayson Road Subdivision project proceed, the analysis of and mitigation for the impacts to the Valley Oak Woodland must adhere to the analysis and mitigation requirements of CEQA. The proposed 3:1 replacement formula is inadequate. As noted in CDFW’s letter: Trees should be replaced at a level that will offset: 1) the lost biomass and canopy of the removed trees, and 2) the substantial temporal loss of growth habitat structure and diversity. Trees planted need to be spaced in a manner that promotes their Response to CWF Comments January 3, 2024 long-term growth habits, and that serves to replicate or enhance the state of which was disturbed. Response 3: This comment reiterates the comments in the CDFW comment letter and is addressed in RTC Response to CDFW-3. Comment 4: The mitigation plan also lacks sufficient performance standards. Response 4: While the trees planted as mitigation are presumed to experience a very high survival rate due to the proximity to managed landscapes and ability to irrigate during the initial establishment period, monitoring and performance standards can be used to supplement Mitigation Measure Biology 2 to address this comment and any others referencing performance standards related to tree removals and replacement. Proposed performance standards language is below: Annual monitoring of the mitigation trees shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during an initial establishment period. During annual monitoring, a minimum of 80% of the mitigation trees shall be alive and healthy (as demonstrated by growth and fruiting, as appropriate). If at any point during annual monitoring, survival and health drop below the minimum health requirement (80% healthy trees), an assessment of cause(s) for this health failure shall be provided by the qualified biologist, and remedial actions shall be implemented. If survival drops below 80%, trees will be replaced in- kind and at the same location, unless a different species or location is prescribed by the qualified biologist as part of remedial recommendations. Annual monitoring will occur up to 10 years, but may cease before then if the above success criteria are met during five consecutive years. Comment 5: Further, the suitability of the replanting scheme does not meet the requirements of CEQA to reach the less-than-significant threshold and will result in a net loss of oak woodland. Response 5: This comment is addressed in RTC Response to CDFW-3. Comment 6: Lastly, Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 limits oak tree planting to half of the mitigation for oak impacts and requires mitigation trees planted to be maintained during a seven-year establishment period. Thus, the current plan’s exclusive reliance on tree planting is out-of-compliance with this requirement. Further, it must include either the code’s seven-year establishment period or the 10-year period recommended in CDFW’s letter. Response to CWF Comments January 3, 2024 Response 6: The Project’s adherence to Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 is addressed in RTC Response to SHIKANY-71. Monitoring and maintenance during the mitigation trees’ establishment period are discussed above in Response 4. During the Public Review period, the County received numerous comments from neighbors complaining about the Project and its use of the DBL and associated incentives and concessions and waivers or reductions of development standards. The most frequently voiced concerns were about the density of the Project as well as concerns regarding speculative impacts to Grayson Creek. In August of 2022, Calibr Ventures retained First Carbon Solutions (FCS), which has provided environmental consulting services for more than 39 years to public and private sector clients throughout California, including the cities of Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, Pittsburg, Hercules, Brentwood, Richmond, San Ramon, Antioch, Oakley, and Brentwood, among others. In addition, FCS has provided environmental review services for over 100 projects in the County itself, including recently for the Del Hombre Apartments Project EIR, Oak Road Townhouse Condominiums Project EIR, and Peer Review of Technical Studies, Tassajara Parks EIR, FSRE Industrial Concord Project EIR, CenterPoint Properties Logistics Warehouse Project EIR, and Scannell Properties Logistics Warehouse Project EIR. FCS plainly has a substantial track record preparing appropriate and legally-defensible environmental review. FCS’s scope here was to peer review the existing environmental studies and prepare new studies for the Project (including sound, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, energy analysis, and biology). Utilizing the updated studies, FCS Staff revised and updated the 2022 Initial Study and provided the Initial Study (along with the new studies and the peer reviewed studies) to County Planning Staff for their use in preparation of a revised Mitigated Negative Declaration. With the new and peer reviewed studies, County Staff published the revised Public Review and Notice to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), which was sent and published on March 24, 2023. Similar to the 2022 MND, numerous comments were submitted by the neighbors complaining about the Project and its use of the DBL and associated incentives and concessions and waivers or reductions of development standards. Specifically, and similar to the 2022 public review period, one neighbor (a former advanced planner with Humboldt County) provided an 18-page comment letter providing numerous concerns about the Project and its use of the DBL as well as other project related comments and concerns designed to thwart the Project. That comment letter contained 127 separate comments. All 127 of the comments have been specifically addressed (in addition to all of the other comments) and the 48-page response to these comments is attached to this letter for reference. On October 2, 2023, the County Zoning Administrator (who had legal authority to approve the Project) held a properly noticed public hearing regarding the Project. To give the public an opportunity to speak and to read and analyze all of the written comments regarding the Project, the Zoning Administrator continued the hearing to October 16, 2023, and took additional testimony at that hearing. The Zoning Administrator considered all of the evidence in the record and rendered a decision, approving the Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus request, and adopting the MND. Under provisions of the Permit Streamlining Act and Senate Bill 330 that do not depend on the filing of a Preliminary Application, now that the Project has been approved and CEQA compliance achieved we note that the County has 60 days to conduct all of the hearings (at most 5) allowed by SB 330. (See Government Code sections 65950(a)(4) and 65905.5)). On October 26, 2023, the self-described “Mohawk/Iroquois Neighborhood” appealed the Zoning Administrator’s approval of the Project. The 15-page appeal letter raised the exact same issues that were raised during both the 2022 and 2023 public review periods. Responses to those comments were previously addressed as part of the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. Additionally, as noted above, the complete 48-page response to these comments is attached to this letter for the Commission’s reference. In December of 2023, the Board of Supervisors adopted the revised Housing Element and Certified the EIR, which listed the two subject properties as part of “Table A Housing Element Sites Inventory” with the total capacity of 8 units based upon the existing General Plan Land Use Designation State Housing Law The HAA is a housing production statute that seeks “to significantly increase the approval and construction of new housing for all economic segments of California’s communities by meaningfully and effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development projects . . . . (§ 65589.5(a)(2)(K)). Moreover, the HAA expresses the state’s policy that this statute “be interpreted and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing.” (Gov. Code § 65589.5(a)(2)(L)). As relevant here, subdivision (j) of the HAA directs that a decision to disapprove or reduce the density of a project that complies with “applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards” must be based on written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence that (1) the project would have “a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety” and (2) that there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid this adverse impact. (Gov't Code § 65589.5(j)(1)). The HAA defines a “specific, adverse impact” to mean “a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.” (Gov't Code § 65589.5(j)(1)(A)). Section 65589.5(j) thus requires cities to determine whether a project complies with the applicable, objective general plan, zoning, subdivision, and design standards. The HAA defines the term “objective” to mean “involving no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and being uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official.” (Gov. Code § 65589.5(h)(8)). Cities must make this determination based on the “reasonable person” standard cited above. (Gov. Code § 65589.5(f)(4)). Accordingly, if a housing project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, subdivision, and design standards in the eyes of a reasonable person, the project cannot be disapproved or conditioned on a lower density unless, based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record, it would have a "specific, adverse impact" upon public health or safety and there is no feasible way to mitigate that impact without disapproving the project or requiring that it be built at a lower density. If a county’s disapproval or conditional approval is challenged in court, the burden is on the County to prove its decision conformed to all the conditions specified in the HAA. (Gov. Code § 65589.6). The courts have explained that the HAA’s findings constitute the “only” grounds for a lawful disapproval of a housing development project. (North Pacifica, LLC v. City of Pacifica (N.D.Cal. 2002) 234 F.Supp.2d 1053, 1059-60, disapproved on other grounds in North Pacifica LLC v. City of Pacifica (2008) 526 F.3d 478; see also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715-16). Moreover, the HAA creates such a “substantial limitation" on the government's discretion to deny a permit that it amounts to a constitutionally protected property interest. (North Pacifica, LLC v. City of Pacifica, supra, 234 F.Supp.2d at 1059). In addition to the HAA, as a result of providing 10% moderate-income BMR units, the Project is eligible for a density bonus under the state DBL, one incentive or concession from development standards that result in actual and identifiable affordable housing cost reductions, and unlimited waivers or reductions of development standards that would physically preclude construction of the Project at its proposed and allowed density. (Gov. Code §§ 65915(d)(2); (e)(1); (f)(1)). “The applicant is not required to prove the requested incentives will lead to cost reductions; the incentive is presumed to result in cost reductions . . . .” (Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego, 74 Cal.App.5th 755, 770 (2022)). The County’s ability to deny a requested incentive/concession is limited to whether an incentive/concession: (1) would have “a specific, adverse impact . . . upon public health and safety,”(2) would have an adverse impact on any historic resource, or (3) would be contrary to state or federal law. (Id. at §65915(d)(1)(B)-(C), (e)(1)). The County bears the burden of proof for the denial of a requested incentive/concession. (Id. at § 65915(d)(4)). In addition to “incentives/concessions,” the DBL provides for the grant of an unlimited number of waivers for any development standards “that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of [the Project] at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by [Government Code section 65915].” (Gov. Code § 65915(e)(1); Bankers Hill 150, supra, 74 Cal.App.5th 755, 775 (“so long as a proposed housing development project meets the criteria of the Density Bonus Law by including the necessary affordable units, a city may not apply any development standard that would physically preclude construction of that project as designed . . . .”)). Appellant Falsely Claims there are potentially significant environmental impacts as a result of the utilization of Density Bonus Law and associated Incentives and Concessions and Waivers or Reductions of Development Standards. The Appellants are driven by thwarting the Project by whatever means necessary and have clearly and consistently articulated that they do not want the Project to occur in their respective backyards (see, e.g., Nextdoor post above) and do not agree with the applicable and controlling provisions of state housing law. During the public review period and as part of this appeal, the Appellants have worked diligently to conflate CEQA impacts with the use of the HAA and DBL. However, State Law was amended in 2021 by AB 3194 to ensure that density bonus projects could not be denied for environmental reasons. Specifically, AB 3194 eliminated the ability for the denial of a density bonus, incentives and concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards due to an adverse impact to the physical environment. The DBL now requires a public agency to approve density bonus projects unless a public health and safety impact finding (i.e., a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact) can be made. In the case of this Project, there is no evidence much less a preponderance of the evidence to support those findings. Notwithstanding AB 3194, and to demonstrate that the Project does not have a significant impact on the environment (with the inclusion of appropriate mitigation measures), 13 different studies and reports were conducted (including air quality, Biological Resource Analysis, Biological Resource Analysis addendum, energy use, noise analysis, greenhouse gas analysis, cultural resource survey, two preliminary geotechnical reports, final geotechnical report, preliminary stormwater control plan, final stormwater control plan, and hydrological and stormwater detention report) and three of those studies (Biological Resource Analysis, cultural resource survey, and the preliminary geotechnical report) were peer reviewed. Additionally, all the plans and reports were reviewed by County Engineering and Planning Staff. Finally, State Housing and Community Development Staff also provided guidance to Planning Staff regarding the HAA and DBL. All of the studies and reports (including the MND, which summarizes them) were prepared by certified and licensed professionals, many of whom are the most qualified and respected in their particular field of expertise. The Appellants have made it abundantly clear by the comments provided and the testimony given during the public hearings, that they simply do not want any housing project approved on the Project Site. They have provided no realistic Project alternatives and no Project modifications. Simply, the Appellants do not want this Project Site developed and are determined to use CEQA and any other potential tools to stop this Project and prevent the new housing from being constructed. This common “Not in My Backyard” tactic in which neighbors raise every conceivable issue to block any proposal for development near them is the very reason the Legislature continues to strengthen state housing law and reduce local control over the review and approval of new housing. As demonstrated by the record, the Project is consistent with all applicable, objective provisions of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, which were fully analyzed pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq. and 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq.; collectively, “CEQA”). Contrary to Appellants’ claims, there is no evidence in the record, much less substantial evidence, that would support the claim of a fair argument that as a result of the Project that there would be significant impact to the environment. Furthermore, there is no claim, much less a preponderance of the evidence in the record, to support a finding that the Project as proposed would have a “specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety.” By the time this appeal will have been heard by the Planning Commission, four years will have passed since this project has been filed. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been expended on it. Unfortunately, given the time that has passed, the utility plans and associated contracts approved by both PG&E and EBMUD for this Project will have expired and will be required to be reissued and or redesigned, which will add to the costs already incurred by this unwarranted delay in approval. We have worked to design much-needed new housing that fits within the community, the Project Site, and its surroundings, contrary to Appellant claims. Additional density beyond what the Project currently proposes is potentially available to the project under Density Bonus Law. Implementation of this project has proven extremely difficult as all of our costs have significantly increased as a result of the numerous delays we have endured. For all of these reasons, we urge the Planning Commission to reject this appeal. Because the County is already outside the 60-day period (See Government Code 65950(a)(4)) to conduct any allowed hearings on the Project, the Planning Commission’s hearing must be the last County hearing on the Project. Thank you. Andy Byde Partner cc: Joseph Lawlor, Senior Planner Billy Reed, Calibr Ventures Bryan Wenter, Miller, Star, Regalia Jason Brandman, First Carbon Solutions Attachments: 1. Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project, January 3, 2024 – Response to California Wildlife Foundation Comment Letter, Prepared by Integral Consulting 2. Results of 2023 Rare Plant Surveys for the Grayson Road Project, July 12, 2023, Prepared by Integral Consulting 3. Grayson Road Tree Mitigation Plan, July 13, 2023, prepared by RW Stover and Associates Landscape Architect 4. Response To Comments, July 31, 2023, Prepared by First Carbon Solutions Integral Consulting Inc. 433 Visitacion Ave Brisbane, CA 94005 telephone: 415.602.2970 www.integral-corp.com MEMORANDUM To: Andy Byde, Calibr Ventures, Partner From: Haley Henderson, Integral Consulting Inc, Botanist Date: July 12, 2023 Subject: Results of 2023 Rare Plant Surveys for the Grayson Road Project Project No.: C3735 Purpose: This memo has been prepared to report the findings from one season of floristic surveys comprising three field visits conducted in the spring season of 2023. These surveys were conducted to confirm the presence or absence of special status plant species on the Grayson Road project site (Study Area). Methods: Integral Consulting Inc botanist Ms. Haley Henderson conducted focused floristic surveys following guidelines established for rare plant surveys by CDFW (CDFG 2000, 2009, CDFW 2018) and CNPS (CNPS 2001). Three surveys were conducted to cover the peak bloom time for the target plant species found in Table 1 (below). Surveys were conducted March 23rd, May 1st, and June 8th, 2023. Surveys were floristic in nature with all encountered plants identified to a level necessary to determine rarity and often to a greater level. Transects were walked systematically with a varying width to ensure all area could be seen based on the thickness and type of vegetation. A full plant list is below in Table 2. Table 1. Protected Species with the Potential to Occur: Scientific Name Common Name Status Probability of Occurring on Site Found on Site Helianthella castanea Diablo helianthella CNPS Rank 1B.2 Low No Calochortus pulchellus Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern CNPS Rank 1B.2 Low No Amsinckia lunaris Bent-flowered fiddleneck CNPS Rank 1B.2 Low No Conclusion: The vegetation community found on site was primarily Valley Oak and mixed woodland with an understory of non-native annual grasses. There is a riparian corridor with associated upland riparian woodland on the south and east side of the Study Area. 2023 Rare Plant Survey Results Page 2 of 3 The non-native annual grassland vegetation community is spread across the understory of the Study Area. Plant species typical of this community include wild oats (Avena fatua), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), English ivy (Hedera helix), and cleavers (Galium aparine). Above, the tree canopy is dominated by oak trees (Quercus agrifolia and Q. lobata) with the presence of a number of other species such as blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) and coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). The riparian vegetation understory is dominated by poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum) and periwinkle (Vinca major). The tree canopy includes willows (Salix spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica). No special status species were identified on site during the 2023 field surveys. No further surveys are recommended. Table 2. Complete Species List Scientific name Common name Aesculus californica Buckeye Allium amplectens Narrow leaved onion Arum italicum Italian lords and ladies Avena fatua Wild oat Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush Brassica rapa Common mustard Briza minor Little rattlesnake grass Bromus diandrus Rip-gut brome Bromus hordeaceus Soft chess Calocedrus decurrens Incense cedar Cardamine oligosperma Bittercress Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle Claytonia perfoliata Miners lettuce Clematis viticella Alba luxurians Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed Daucus carota Wild carrot Diospyros virginiana Persimmon Epilobium brachycarpum Tall annual willowherb Eucalyptus globulus Blue gum Eucalyptus polyanthemos Silver dollar eucalyptus Festuca bromoides Brome fescue Festuca perennis Italian rye grass Ficus carica Common fig 2023 Rare Plant Survey Results Page 3 of 3 Galium aparine Cleavers Geranium dissectum Wild geranium Hedera helix English ivy Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon Hordeum murinum Foxtail barley Hypochaeris radicata Hairy catsears Juglans nigra Black walnut Juncus bufonius Common toad rush Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce Marah fabacea California man-root Marus alba Mulberry Medicago polymorpha Burclover Melilotus indicus Annual yellow sweetclover Nerium oleander Oleander Opuntia ficus-indica Fig opuntia Oxalis pes-caprae Bermuda buttercup Photinia spp. Ornamental shrub Pistacia chinensis Chinese pistachio Poa annua Annual blue grass Prunus spp. Plum Pyrus communis Common pear Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak Quercus lobata Valley oak Raphanus sativus Wild radish Rosa californica Wild rose Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry Rumex acetosella Sheep sorrel Salix spp. Willow Senecio vulgaris Common groundsel Sequoia sempervirens Coast redwood Sonchus asper Spiny sowthistle Taraxacum officinale Common dandelion Toxicodendron diversilobum Poison oak Trifolium albopurpureum Rancheria clover Trifolium campestre Hop clover G R A Y S O N R O A DLOT 1LOT 2LOT 3LOT 4LOT 5LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8LOT 9LOT 10FAAJQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS LOBATACERCIS OCCIDENTALISMUHLENBERGIA RIGENSRHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'EVE CASE'ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'MONTEREY CARPET'FESTUCA CALIFORNICAARBUTUS MENZEISIIQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS LOBATAEXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES, STATUS & PROTECTION MEASURES.EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES, STATUS & PROTECTION MEASURES.GRAYSON ROADAJQUERCUS CHRYSOLEPISQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS CHRYSOLEPISLOT 1LOT 2LOT 3FAAJQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS LOBATACERCIS OCCIDENTALISMUHLENBERGIA RIGENSRHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'EVE CASE'ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'MONTEREY CARPET'FESTUCA CALIFORNICAARBUTUS MENZEISIIEXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES, STATUS & PROTECTION MEASURES.GRAYSON ROADAJQUERCUS CHRYSOLEPISPLANT MATERIALS LISTWUCOLSSYMBOLBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEWATER USENUMBERTREES:ARBUTUS MENZIESIIMADRONE24" BOX LOW13CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS (LOW-BRANCH) WESTERN REDBUD 24" BOX LOW7QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPISCANYON LIVE OAK 24" BOX VERY LOW 17QUERCUS AGRIFOLIACOAST LIVE OAK24" BOX VERY LOW 26QUERCUS LOBATAVALLEY OAK24" BOX LOW4QUERCUS AGRIFOLIACOAST LIVE OAK15 GA VERY LOW 13QUERCUS LOBATAVALLEY OAK15 GA LOW14AESCULUS CALIFORNICACALIFORNIA BUCKEYE 15 GAL VERY LOW35ARBUTUS MENZIESIIMADRONE15 GA LOW1QUERCUS AGRIFOLIACOAST LIVE OAK5 GA*VERY LOW 17QUERCUS LOBATAVALLEY OAK5 GA*LOW13ARBUTUS MENZIESIIMADRONE5 GA*LOW2SHRUBS:MUHLENBERGIA RIGENSDEER GRASS1 GA LOW66RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'EVE CASE' COFFEEBERRY 5 GA LOW20GROUND COVERS:A ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'MONTEREY CARPET' MANZANITA CARPET 1 GA@ 48" O.C. LOW1,205 SFF FESTUCA CALIFORNICACALIFORNIA FESCUE 1 GA@ 30" O.C. LOW780 SFJ JUNCUS PATENSGRAY RUSH1 GA@ 30" O.C. LOW820 SFSUBDIVISION 1024-1026 GRAYSON ROAD CONTRA COSTA COUNT, CALIFORNIA RW Stover & Associates, Inc. Landscape Architecture Ph: 925.933.2583 1620 North Main Street, Suite 4 Walnut Creek, CA 94596SITE MAPL1.1TREE MITIGATION PLAN MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2GENERAL NOTES:1.All planting shall be watered by a fully automatic irrigation system.2.Welded-wire cages shall be constructedaround all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory.MITIGATION NOTES:·18 native trees removed within riparian area:·Replaced with 54 native trees·32 Native Trees removed in valley oak woodland area·Replaced with 104 Native trees:(67)AT 24" BOX SIZE, (63) AT 15 GAL SIZE, (32) AT 5 GAL SIZE*GENERAL NOTES:1.All planting shall be watered by a fully automatic irrigation system.2.Welded-wire cages shall be constructedaround all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory.*Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees, except that up to 50 percent of the required replacement trees may be planted as 5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smallercontainer size. LOT 4LOT 5LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8LOT 9LOT 10QUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS LOBATAEXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES, STATUS & PROTECTION MEASURES.QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPISQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAG R A Y S O N R O A DLOT 1LOT 2LOT 3LOT 4LOT 5LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8LOT 9LOT 10FAAJQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS LOBATACERCIS OCCIDENTALISMUHLENBERGIA RIGENSRHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'EVE CASE'ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'MONTEREY CARPET'FESTUCA CALIFORNICAARBUTUS MENZEISIIQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS LOBATAEXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES, STATUS & PROTECTION MEASURES.EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES, STATUS & PROTECTION MEASURES.GRAYSON ROADAJQUERCUS CHRYSOLEPISQUERCUS AGRIFOLIAQUERCUS CHRYSOLEPISMATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2REFER TO SHEET L1.1 FOR PLANT MATERIALS LISTSUBDIVISION 1024-1026 GRAYSON ROAD CONTRA COSTA COUNT, CALIFORNIA RW Stover & Associates, Inc. Landscape Architecture Ph: 925.933.2583 1620 North Main Street, Suite 4 Walnut Creek, CA 94596SITE MAPL1.2TREE MITIGATION PLAN 1 July 31, 2023, Prepared by First Carbon Solutions State Agencies California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Response to CDFW-1 The comment provides introductory remarks and requests that previous comment letter be addressed and met as part of the Conditions of Approval for the proposed project by the County. Response to CDFW-2 The Draft IS/MND notes that 16 special-status plant species have been documented in the vicinity of the project site. Four of which have the potential to occur at the project site and hold known records within a reasonable dispersal distance for propagules (California Native Plant Society [CNPS]–East Bay Chapter 2018). The Biological Resources Analysis (BRA) and Draft IS/MND, states that only one site visit was conducted for a floristic survey on April 6, 2021, resulting in no observations of special-status plants at the project site. CDFW recommends that the project area be surveyed for special-status plants by a qualified Botanist following the “Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities,” (Protocol) which can be found online at Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survfey-Protocols#377281280-plants. If State-listed plants, special-status plants, State rare plants found on the CNPS California Rare Plant Ranking system, or plants found on the CNPS East Bay Chapter’s Database of Rare and Unusual Plants are identified during botanical surveys, consultation with the CDFW is warranted to determine whether the proposed project can avoid take. In the absence of botanical surveys being performed in accordance with the Protocol, presence of said species should be assumed and mitigated for accordingly. Impacts for California Endangered Species Act (CESA)-listed plant species should be fully avoided or addressed through application for, and issuance of, an Incidental Take Permit (ITP). Impacts to special-status plant species not listed under CESA should be mitigated for either by individual or acreage, depending on the species. CDFW recommends all future mitigation measures be summarized and disclosed to the public through the appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) disclosure procedures in a revised and recirculated IS/MND. Response to CDFW-3 The Draft IS/MND, supported by the included Revised Arborist Report dated May 6, 2020, and authored by Traverso Tree Service, indicates that 83 trees, 6.5 inches or greater in diameter at breast height (DBH), from an on-site upland woodland would be removed as a result of the proposed project. Of the trees slated for removal, 32 are coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia), 20 valley oaks (Quercus lobata), and the remaining 31 being an assemblage of native, native yet not local, and non-native trees. Many of these trees are described as multi-trunk and/or hold features displaying growth habit associated with individuals aged more than 50 years. An analysis of oak natural communities was not provided, and the 2 Revised Arborist Report did not include an assessment of canopy cover and absolute percentages in upland areas or covering the channel of Grayson Creek. The Draft IS/MND fails to note that this collection of oaks may be identified as Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, based on these initial findings; both of which are Sensitive Natural Communities ranked as State Rank 3 and 4 respectively according to the CDFW’s Natural Communities List Website : https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities#sensitive%20natural%20communities). The Draft IS/MND indicates within Mitigation Measure Biology-8 that a 3:1 (mitigation: loss) ratio would be sought to mitigate for the loss of native trees caused by the proposed project. However, Mitigation Measure Biology-8 does not include a replanting regime associated with the monitoring component. The proposed ratio and lack of success criteria and monitoring period are inadequate for mitigating the project-related impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities to a level of less than significant. CDFW recommends that the Draft IS/MND evaluate impacts to native tree species with a DBH of greater than 3 inches in the project area that would be removed as part of the proposed project. Because of the cumulative impacts and increasing rarity of Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest in proximity to the project area (i.e., remaining percentage of the communities within the County compared against their historic range within) and the State, the slow-growth habit and pattern of both of these natural communities, CDFW recommends mitigating for the loss of Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, at a 10:1 (mitigation: loss) ratio for both trees removed by quantity, and understory removed by area. This 10:1 ratio should include container plantings, replanting salvage vegetation, and hydroseeding with Valley Oak Woodland, and/or Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest, focal species on-site at the point of disturbance in addition to a CDFW approved off-site mitigation component. Trees should be replaced at a level that will offset: (1) the lost biomass and canopy of the removed trees, and (2) the substantial temporal loss of growth habitat structure and diversity. Trees planted need to be spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits, and that serves to replicate or enhance the state of which was disturbed. As an alternative to container planting, the project proponent may elect to protect, enhance, and preserve an area of mature oak woodland of equal or greater habitat value under a conservation easement in accordance with the mitigation ratio described above. The project proponent should prepare a Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP) outlining success criteria and benchmarks aligned to meet the 10:1 (mitigation: loss) ratio goal at the end of 10 years after initial mitigation efforts begin. CDFW recommends recirculating an updated IS/MND after performing a detailed analysis of such impacts to trees, Sensitive Natural Communities, and including appropriate mitigation measures to reduce the impacts of the proposed project to a level of less than significant. The BRA Addendum provides an analysis of project impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities, drawing the conclusion that the proposed project would result in removal of 1.1 acre of Valley Oak Woodland. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodlan d in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with a replacement tree planting plan that shall be approved by the County along with landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. The mitigation ratio contained is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice. 3 The comment does not provide any ecological or other basis for concluding the tree replanting Mitigation Measure Biology-2 is inadequate, or to support the request for additional mitigation for the removal of trees. Review and approval of the County-required tree mitigation by the commenter is not required. The County as the Lead Agency is responsible for oversight of the tree mitigation, consistent with County Ordinance. The comment does not provide any ecological or other basis for recommending a 10:1 mitigation ratio for the removal of trees or the need for a 10 year monitoring plan, and does not provide any reason why 3:1 mitigation for native trees and 1:1 mitigation for non-native trees would not mitigate potential impacts to trees to less than significant. Trees that would be removed by the proposed project are generally common trees locally and several of the trees that would be removed are dead, in poor health, or have been topped by Pacific Gas and Energy Company (PG&E) and the Arborist recommended their removal. The most appropriate location to mitigate for the loss of trees at the project site is on-site, and the comment does not provide any basis for suggesting that off-site tree planting would be necessary or appropriate to mitigate potential project impacts. Mitigation Measure Biology-2, includes adequate replacement for the removal of trees, adequate measures to protect existing trees that would be retained, and adequate assurances that new plantings would be installed in connection with new development in appropriate locations and in accordance with professional standards to ensure adequate survival to mitigate for the potential impact to County-protected trees. With these mitigation measures in place, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to trees and Valley Oak Woodland . For the reasons discussed in response to comments above, the proposed project’s potential impacts to trees and Valley Oak Woodlan d have been adequately analyzed, no further mitigation is required, and the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to trees. For these reasons, the Draft IS/MND does not need to be recirculated. Response to CDFW-4 The Draft IS/MND indicates in Mitigation Measure Biology-1 that nesting bird surveys would be limited to the large trees of the adjacent riparian area from February 15 to August 31. This measure fails to avoid ground nesting birds and those that nest in shrubs. CDFW recommends the following mitigation measure be incorporated into a revised and recirculated IS/MND: a qualified Biologist shall survey for non-raptors within and beyond the project area for a radius of 250 feet, and for raptors within and beyond the project area for a radius of 1,000 feet; nesting surveys shall occur from February 15 through September 15 and within 5 days prior to the expected commencement of project activities; surveys shall be repeated in areas where project activities lapse for a period of 7 days or more; any active nests shall have an appropriately sized protective buffer determined and established by a qualified Biologist where no project personnel or equipment shall be allowed to enter; that any active nest be continuously monitored by a qualified Biologist; and that active nest buffers shall increase if any change in bird behavior is detected as determined by a qualified Biologist. Mitigation Measure Biology-3 includes additional survey requirements to protect birds that nest on the ground, in shrubs, and on structures that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, 4 Mitigation Measure Biology-3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. The proposed survey buffers (area around the project site where surveys should occur) provided by the commenter are excessive given the current conditions both on-site and surrounding the project site (primarily residential development). Accordingly, it is appropriate for a qualified Biologist to determine the extent of the survey area/survey buffers, including a determination of the zone of influence (the area immediately surrounding the project site that supports suitable nesting habitat that could be impacted by the proposed project due to visual or auditory disturbance associated with the removal of vegetation and construction activities scheduled to occur during the nesting season). Response to CDFW-5 CDFW recommends the following language replace Mitigation Measure Biology-4 to mitigate for the permanent impacts to special-status bats and their habitats to a level of less than significant: 1. Special-status Bats (Bats). For all project activities planned in or adjacent to potential bat roosting habitat, such as structures and/or involving woody vegetation modification or removal of any and all trees, a qualified Biologist shall conduct daytime and evening acoustic surveys in addition to extensive visual surveys of potential habitat for special-status bats at least 7 days prior to initiation of project activities. If bats are found on-site, a qualified Biologist shall identify the species, estimated quantity present, roost type, and roost status, but shall avoid disturbing bats during surveys. A qualified Biologist shall also create a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan if special-status bat species are detected prior to the start of project activities. The Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) an assessment of all project impacts to special-status bats, including noise disturbance during construction; (2) effective avoidance and minimization measures to protect special-status bats; (3) and compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to special-status bats or their nesting/roosting habitat. If structures, trees, or other refugia equivalents are slated for limbing, removal, or modification, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include the following measures: 1.1. To ensure that special -status bats have left potential roosting refugia, work shall occur over the course of two days. On the first day, smaller limbs or items from the identified trees or structures shall be brushed back or modified in the late afternoon. This disturbance should cause any potential roosting bats to seek other roosts during their nighttime foraging. The remainder of the refugia item can then be further limbed or removed as needed on the second day as late in the afternoon as feasible. If bats are found injured, or if bat mortality occurs during the course of tree work, a qualified Biologist shall record the species impacted, and the number of individuals documented. 1.2. Tree limbing, modification, removal, or work on structural refugia shall not be performed under any of the following conditions: during any precipitation events, when ambient temperatures are below 4.5 degrees Celsius, when windspeeds exceed 11 miles per hour, and/or any other condition which may lead to bats seeking refuge. 1.3. If special-status bats are found utilizing a tree, structure, or equivalent for roosting, the Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall include permanent artificial roosting habitat installation that shall be adjacent to, and sufficient for, the species observed and 5 associated ecology thereof. Effective buffer zones for the installation and monitoring of the artificial roosts shall be determined and established by a qualified Biologist. Artificial roosts shall follow the 2018 Acceptable Management Practices for Bat Species Inhabiting Transportation Infrastructure (found a t https://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents2020/cpt-ma-bats-transportion- structures-management-2018-04.pdf). Mitigation Measure Biology-8 includes the above recommended prescription. Response to CDFW-6 CDFW requires a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq., for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank including associated riparian or wetland resources; or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Work within ephemeral streams, washes, watercourses with a subsurface flow, and floodplains are subject to notification requirements. Based on the Vesting Tentative Map for the proposed project, dated January 28, 2022, and authored by DeBolt Civil Engineering, an LSA Notification under Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. would be a requirement of the proposed project as designed. As stated within the BRA Addendum, as project implementation would result in impacts to CDFW’s Fish and Game Code Sections 1600–1607 jurisdiction, a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) would be required. The project proponent will apply for an LSAA prior to project implementation. Response to CDFW-7 CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21003, subd. (e)). Accordingly, please report any special- status species and natural communities detected during project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNDDB field survey form, online field survey form, and contact information for CNDDB staff can be found at the following link: Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/data/CNDDB/submitting-data. Any special-status species found to exist at the site during biological surveys or project implementation will be reported to the CNDDB. 7 Local Agencies East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Response to EBMUD-1 The comment provides introductory remarks and general project information. No response is required. Response to EBMUD-2 The comment states that they provided prior comments on April 27, 2022, and that those comments still apply to the revised project regarding water service and water conservation. Responses to prior comments are addressed in Response to EBMUD-4 through EBMUD-9 below. Response to EBMUD-3 The comment provides concluding remarks and agency contact information. No response is required. Response to EBMUD-4 The comment provides introductory remarks and general project information. No response is required. Response to EBMUD-5 The comment expresses the need for all proposed subdivided lots to contain individual water meters. Furthermore, the comment states that the proposed project will need to be served by a main water extension, provided at the project sponsor’s expense. The comment requests that the project sponsor contact EBMUD’s New Business Office to request a water service estimate to determine costs and conditions for providing water service to the proposed project once the project’s development plans have been finalized. The comment cautions that the engineering and installation of water mains and services require substantial lead time, which should be factored into the proposed project’s development schedule. As noted in the comment, the project applicant would be required to coordinate with EBMUD to connect to water service. The comment has been provided to the applicant for their review. Response to EBMUD-6 The comment states that a minimum 20-foot right-of-way is required for the installation of new water mains, and that utilities to be installed in the right-of-way with the water mains must meet horizontal and vertical separation distances established by Title 22, Section 64572 of the California Code of Regulations and EBMUD requirements for placements of water mains within a right-of-way. These requirements include, but are not limited to, minimum horizontal separation distances of 10 feet between the water main and sewer, 5 feet between water main and storm drain, 7 feet from the face of the curb, and 5 feet from the edge of the right-of-way, and a minimum vertical separation distance of 1-foot above storm drains and sewers for water mains. Furthermore, the comment states that the EBMUD cannot maintain water mains and services under pervious pavement. As such, the comment expresses the need for an alternative to pervious pavement if installation of EBMUD water mains or services is required. This comment is noted. The required water infrastructure will be incorporated into the project. The project applicant would be required to coordinate with EBMUD to connect to water service. The comment has been provided to the applicant for their review. 8 Response to EBMUD-7 The comment requests that the County include a condition of approval requiring the proposed project to comply with Assembly Bill (AB) 325, Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). Section 2.6, Energy, of the Draft IS/MND found in its analysis that the proposed project would comply with the State MWELO requirements. The comment has been provided to the County for their review and consideration for integration as a condition of approval. Response to EBMUD-8 The comment states that water service from the EBMUD cannot be furnished to the proposed project unless all applicable water efficiency measures described in Section 31 of the EBMUD’s Water Service Regulations are installed at the project sponsor’s expense. As stated in response EBMUD-7, Section 2.6, Energy, of the Draft IS/MND found in its analysis that the proposed project would comply with the State MWELO requirements. As noted in the comment, the project applicant would be required to comply with Section 31 of EBMUD’s Water Service Regulations at the applicant’s expense. The comment has been provided to the applicant for their review. Response to EBMUD-9 The comment provides concluding remarks and agency contact information. No response is required. 9 Individuals Suzanne Francois (FRANCOIS) Response to FRANCOIS-1 The comment is concerned about the lack of detail provided about the proposed project. The comment requests more information, such as building specifics, ADU details, riparian setback details, lighting, and more. The comment adds that the project site’s wildlife impact reports are incomplete. The proposed project would not construct ADUs. Specific building details can be found in Draft IS/MND Table 2, Housing Mix Summary, and Table 3, Project Summary and Alternative Development Standards. A 50-foot setback from the Creek for protection of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor would be provided, as described in Draft IS/MND Section 1.4, Project Description, and as shown in Draft IS/MND Exhibit 5, Vesting Tentative Map. Lighting impacts were analyzed in Draft IS/MND Section 2.1(d), which found that new sources of light and glare would originate from internal and external housing lights and car headlights. Lighting from the project site would comply with Ordinance Code Article 76-4.612, which requires that newly installed lighting fixtures be controlled or directed so that light and glare would not be blinding to pedestrian and vehicle traffic, or on adjoining properties. As such, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on light and glare. Please see Response to SHIKANY-16, SHIKANY-27, SHIKANY-64, SHIKANY-65, SHIKANY-66, and SHIKANY- 71 for information on wildlife impacts Response to FRANCOIS-2 The comment states that the description of the neighborhood around the project site is inaccurate. The comment adds that the description of the on-site woodland area is also inaccurate. The comment does not provide specifics as to the inaccuracies of the provided descriptions. As such, no further response is required. Response to FRANCOIS-3 The commenter asks how nesting owls residing at the project site will be protected. Mitigation Measure Biology 3 includes pre-construction survey requirements to avoid impacts to nesting birds that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in Project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. Response to FRANCOIS-4 The comment states that the proposed project is not transparent. The comment asks why Grayson Creek and its habitats are not being protected. The comment on the proposed project’s transparency is not an environmental issue. While project implementation would require grading and the removal of trees within the Grayson Creek riparian corridor, a majority of the Grayson Creek riparian corridor will be avoided by project activities (0.80 acre of the 1.01 acres of riparian habitat occurring on-site [79 percent of the on-site riparian habitat] would be avoided). Grayson Creek itself would not be impacted by the proposed project. 10 Response to FRANCOIS-5 The comment provides concluding remarks. No response required. 11 Clay Haberman (HABERMAN) Response to HABERMAN-1 The comment provides introductory remarks and general project information. No response is required. Response to HABERMAN-2 The comment states that 12-hour noise-inducing activities during the week for the proposed project is excessive. Furthermore, the comment requests that noise-inducing activities for the proposed project be limited on Saturdays to 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. See Response to SHIKANY-104 for information on noise-inducing activities. The proposed project, as mitigated, is consistent with the County’s construction noise restrictions. The comment does not provide any evidence that the construction noise would exceed any established thresholds or that additional mitigation is required to reduce impacts to below a level of significance. Response to HABERMAN-3 The commenter states that the Arborist Report and tree survey have not been updated since the property owner removed trees and thus, it must be confirmed with a new tree survey that no protected trees were removed. As approved by the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development on October 28, 2021, a single dead Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) tree that was considered a safety hazard was removed from the site. Removal of this dead tree was not done as part of project activities. Response to HABERMAN-4 The commenter states that a tree protection plan should be mandated as a condition of approval and that the replacement planting requirements should be quantified based on the original survey prior to the removal of trees. A tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits. Response to HABERMAN-5 The comment notes that standard parking stalls are 9 feet wide and 19 feet long. As such, the comment states that the proposed setback of 14 feet would not be able to accommodate cars on the driveway and should not include the garage. The comment notes that standard parking stalls are 19 feet long, and that cars would not be able to park on the proposed driveways as they would be too short and narrow. The comment further notes that the proposed road would be too narrow to accommodate parallel parking, and therefore residents of the proposed project would have to park on Grayson Road. The comment further states that as such, adequate frontage improvements should be provided to Grayson Road to ensure parking space and pedestrian safety. See Response to SHIKANY-8 and SHIKANY-77 regarding pedestrian safety and sidewalks. Per Draft IS/MND Table 3, Project Summary and Alternative Development Standards, the proposed project would enforce a 20-foot minimum front yard setback requirement to the face of the two-car garages in each proposed unit. This would exceed the standard parking stall length of 19 feet, and would thus allow for parking of standard-sized vehicles on the driveways. 12 Response to HABERMAN-6 The comment notes that the proposed project would receive a concession to develop smaller lots as part of the State Density Bonus Law. The comment suggests further decrease to the proposed lot and unit sizes to allow for proper street and driveway improvements. The comment explains that this would result in a reduced burden for adjacent streets and neighbors. See Response to HABERMAN-5 regarding driveway size, and see Response to SHIKANY-8 and SHIKANY-77 regarding sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road. The comment suggests smaller lots and homes to allow for wider streets. As explained in the responses above, the Draft IS/MND did not identify any potential circulation hazards that would require additional mitigation. Response to HABERMAN-7 The comment provides concluding remarks. No response is required. 13 Ann Keeler (KEELER) Response to KEELER-1 The commenter states that there appears to be a flock of band tail pigeons at the property. Band-tailed pigeons (Patagioenas fasciata) are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Mitigation Measure Biology 3 includes pre-construction survey requirements to avoid impacts to birds protected pursuant to the MBTA that may be impacted by project implementation. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 prescribes daily monitoring of active nests and conducting additional nesting surveys if there is a lapse in project activities of 7 or more days during the nesting season. Response to KEELER-2 The comment informs the County that chainsaw noises were heard from the project site. The County is noted in the comments to have reached out to the County’s Code Enforcement Division. The comment concludes however by stating that tree work is being conducted in an adjacent property to the project site. The comment clarifies that tree maintenance work was being conducted on an adjacent property and does not raise any environmental issues that relate to the proposed project or the project site and does not raise any specific environmental issues. Therefore, no further response is required. 15 Lisa Shikany (SHIKANY) Response to SHIKANY-1 The comment provides introductory remarks and summarizes the comment ’s concerns about potential impacts resulting from the proposed project. The concerns pertaining to environmental impacts are addressed in Response to SHIKANY-5 through SHIKANY-127. Response to SHIKANY-2 The comment remarks that they specifically requested for neighbor Jeanne Shikany to be notified of activities pertaining to the proposed project in addition to themselves in an email on May 8, 2022. The comment states that Jeanne Shikany did not receive any notification, and that the County is required to provide adequate notice to anyone requesting it and failed to do so in this case. The comment has been provided to the County for review. Response to SHIKANY-3 The comment states that the County failed to provide the complete Draft IS/MND for public review, and that copies of the various reports prepared to address the impacts of this proposed project were not available, including the addendum to the previous biological assessment, thereby limiting the public’s ability to review and comment on the proposed project. This comment does not address the adequacy of the Draft IS/MND, and thus does not require further response. Response to SHIKANY-4 The comment compares the prior 2007 and 2009 proposal to the proposed project. It states that the 2007 and 2009 proposal better promoted privacy, protected the riparian area, minimized tree removal, and matched the community character with a lower density. Furthermore, the comment notes that the prior project sponsor facilitated better communication with the neighboring residents regarding project concerns and that the current project sponsor has not contacted the neighborhood community. The comment notes that the proposed project contains twice the number of subdivisions, includes setback and lot size waivers and a moderate-income home for the purposes of achieving maximum unit density. The comment notes that the project site contains sensitive habitats and wildlife and that the proposed project removes trees and habitats with no space for replacement. The comment also notes that the proposed project is out of character with the surrounding area. The comment is noted. Please see Response to SHIKANY-5 through SHIKANY-127 regarding density, tree replacement, wildlife and habitat, and community character concerns. Response to SHIKANY-5 The comment states that the applicant did not address neighborhood concerns raised during design review. 16 Response to SHIKANY-6 The comment states the long-term impacts to sensitive habitats and the wildlife that currently utilize them are not addressed in the Draft IS/MND. Please see Response to SHIKANY-16, SHIKANY-27, SHIKANY-64, SHIKANY-65, SHIKANY-66, and SHIKANY- 71. Response to SHIKANY-7 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND does not incorporate mitigation measures such as riparian corridor fencing and a deed restriction prohibiting development, which would have provided long-term protection to Grayson Creek. Please see Response to SHIKANY-27, SHIKANY-58, and SHIKANY-61. Response to SHIKANY-8 The comment expresses concern about the lack of sidewalks and pedestrian safety on Grayson Road due to the density of the proposed project. The comment is noted. Draft IS/MND Section 2.17, Transportation, found that the proposed project would generate an additional 8 AM and 8 PM new peak period trips, which was determined to be a less than significant impact on circulation. The proposed project includes a 5-foot-wide, elevated sidewalk along the proposed new roadway. It would also include a reconstructed asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road, as well as bicycle lane striping. The County’s Complete Streets policy requires streets to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right-of-way for each category of users. The Draft IS/MND found the proposed project to be in compliance with due to the exemption provided in C.1(2) of the County’s Complete Streets policy, which states: “inclusion of Complete Streets design principles would result in a disproportionate cost to the project.” Furthermore, the proposed project qualifies for one exemption or concession from the County pursuant to the Density Bonus Law. The project applicant requested that they provide asphalt-concrete curb along the edge of pavement of Grayson Road along the project frontage as well as bicycle land striping, as shown on the Tentative Map. Pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence of any of the following: a) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. b) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households. c) The concession or incentive would be contrary to State or federal law. 17 The commenter raises concerns related to b), which states that the County can reject a concession request if there would be an adverse impact on public safety. The project frontage is located in excess of 1,000 feet away to the east to the nearest sidewalks. As a result of the isolapon, an isolated sidewalk along the project frontage would not provide pedestrians, cyclists, or vehicles with a safer travel experience along Grayson Road. Additionally the proposed project is only expected to generate an additional 8 AM and 8 PM vehicle trips along Grayson Road, it cannot be concluded that the proposed project would cause an adverse impact on public safety beyond existing conditions. As such, the applicant can legally request this concession, and the County is required to approve it. Response to SHIKANY-9 The comment notes that the following comments will contain environmental concerns from comments made prior to this comment period. No response is required. Response to SHIKANY-10 The comment states that the concept of a Vesting Tentative Map, which constitutes the plans provided by the proposed project, should be described to the public in the Draft IS/MND’s project description . Specifically, the comment requests that it be disclosed that a Vesting Tentative Map allows the proposed project not to comply with any future changes in regulations following the proposed project’s approval. The comment states that the applicant should be required to provide additional project details in exchange for these Vesting Tentative Map benefits and that the County should justify why the proposed project is granted the use of a Vesting Tentative Map. The following is an explanation of a Vesting Tentative Map: The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of Contra Costa County Municipal Code Section 94-2.204 which state the required information for the subdivision of land. CEQA does not require that an IS/MND disclose more details than what is required under CEQA in the case that a Vesting Tentative Map is used. Floor plans and elevations are available and can be provided upon request. Response to SHIKANY-11 The comment states that the project description provided in the Draft IS/MND lacks sufficient detail to serve as the basis for addressing potential project impacts, and many project details are mentioned only in the analysis sections. See Response to SHIKANY-12, SHIKANY-13, SHIKANY-14, and SHIKANY-16 for responses to specific comments regarding missing items in the Draft IS/MND project description. Response to SHIKANY-12 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND’s project description has missing details and is fragmented. The comment specifically references the fact that accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are not referenced in the project description. No ADUs will be developed as part of the proposed project. 18 Response to SHIKANY-13 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND does not state the distance from the Creek to the riparian corridor setback, nor does it describe the width of the riparian corridor that was previously proposed to be protected through mitigation measures. The proposed project would implement a 50-foot setback from the Grayson Creek centerline. This has been incorporated into the project description in the Final IS/MND. No adverse impacts were identified for the proposed project and no additional mitigation is necessary to reduce impacts to below a level of significance. The comment fails to provide any substantial evidence that there is an adverse impact requiring additional mitigation. The Draft IS/MND is not required to incorporate measures proposed in a CEQA document for a previous project. Response to SHIKANY-14 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND project description does not mention the waiver of setback for retaining walls included in the land use section. Furthermore, the comment states that the Draft IS/MND does not describe the location of the retaining walls. The comment is noted. The project description does include the waiver of setback of retaining walls and the Vesting Tentative Map shows the location of the proposed retaining walls. While the setback for the location of the retaining walls is requested to be waived, the setback waiver is only for the new lots; the waiver is not for the setbacks adjacent to other properties. Response to SHIKANY-15 The comment states that much of the proposed project’s site plan lacks labels for many of the lines shown, including, but not limited to, the top of the creek bank and the centerline of the creek channel. The comment is noted. Response to SHIKANY-16 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND project description misses information regarding riparian, oak woodland, and other protected habitat and vegetation on the project site. Furthermore, the Draft IS/MND project description does not describe any wildlife that utilizes the project site. The comment states that this information should be in the project description, not the analysis sections. The comment is noted. Information on protected habitats, wildlife, and vegetation are found the Environmental Settings of Section 2.4, Biological Resources. Some of this information has been incorporated into the project description for purposes of clarification. The proposed project was designed to accommodate a 50-foot creek setback to avoid impacts to the adjacent Grayson Creek and surrounding habitat to the greatest extent feasible, including the avoidance of trees within the riparian corridor. The minimum extent of the creek structure setback was calculated from the top of bank, which was determined in accordance with Title 9, Division 914, (§§ 914-14.010, 914-14.012, and 914-14.014) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Response to SHIKANY-17 The comment states that the description of the area surrounding the project site, that it is single-family residential development, is vague and inaccurate. The commenter states that the adjacent area in 19 unincorporated Contra Costa County has a lower density and smaller unit size than the adjacent area within the City of Pleasant Hill and that the proposed project would not be consistent with the density of the surrounding homes in unincorporated Contra Costa County. The comment is noted. The project description states that the surrounding area consists of single-family homes, which is accurate. The difference in density and size of the surrounding homes in Contra Costa County in comparison to the surrounding homes in the City of Pleasant Hill is noted. However, the project site and the surrounding areas to the south have a land use designation of Single-Family Residential–Low (SL), and are zoned as R-15. The R-15 zoning designation is primarily for single-family detached homes, and permits a unit density of 1.0 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The Density Bonus Law allows for increased density of the proposed project to 3.28 dwelling units per acre. As such, the proposed density is consistent with the SL land use designation. Response to SHIKANY-18 The comment states that the Draft IS/MND has not listed a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW, and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as required discretionary approvals. Section 2.4, Biological Resources, of the Draft IS/MND states that a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW is required. Section 2.10, Hydrology and Quality, outlines RWQCB requirements to implement stormwater controls. The Draft IS/MND has been updated to clarify that this is referring to the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. The proposed project’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan would be approved as part of the Construction General Permit from the RWQCB. Response to SHIKANY-19 The comment states that while classified as an urban area by the Census Bureau, the visual character of the project area is still relatively rural, with significant tree cover and larger lots. The comment finds that the project’s density and home size is inconsistent with the immediate surrounding area. The comment also references Table 1, Section 2.11, Land Use and Planning, in the Draft IS/MND and compares it with Sheet 7 of the project plans, stating that the lot coverage shown in Table 1 is greater than the usable area illustrated in Sheet 7. In particular, Lots 3, 4, and 5 are called out as having less than half of the R-15 zoning designation’s required minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet. The comment thus states that solely considering lot size when determining aesthetic impacts is misleading and that the density and size of the proposed homes is not consistent with the surrounding development in unincorporated Contra Costa County. The analysis in the Draft IS/MND considers numerous issues when evaluating potential aesthetic impacts. As explained in Section 2.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft IS/MND, the proposed project would comply with applicable zoning and other regulations concerning aesthetics with certain concessions to the R-15 zoning development standards allowed by the Density Bonus Law. For example, the proposed project would be required to comply with Ordinance Code Article 76-4.612 related to lighting. As explained in more detail below, the proposed project would include a landscaping plan that will enhance the aesthetic character in accordance with the County’s measurable performance standards identified in the Municipal Code. 20 Response to SHIKANY-20 The comment states that the density of the development must be reduced for the proposed project to not degrade the existing visual character. The comment states that lot size, width, and setback waivers could then be eliminated, and increased setbacks from the creek to the proposed residential development could also be accomplished. The comment is noted. See Response to SHIKANY-17. Response to SHIKANY-21 The comment requests that if a landscaping plan is used to make a less than significant determination in the aesthetics analysis, the proposed project should have measurable performance standards. The applicant would be required to submit a landscape plan prior to the issuance of the first building permit. The County would review the landscaping plan in accordance with the County’s measurable performance standards identified in the Municipal Code. Response to SHIKANY-22 The commenter states that the requirement for “adequate planting of trees and other landscaping” is not a measurable performance standard, and that there needs to be a clear and detailed definition of “adequate.” Please see Response to CDFW-3. Response to SHIKANY-23 The comment states that the Mitigation Measure Aesthetics-1 does not provide lighting standards that prevent light from spilling out onto the creek and riparian corridor. Response to SHIKANY-24 The commenter states that no reports were attached to the MND, and thus, the public was restriction in their ability to comment on the findings. All non-confidential appendices and technical reports may be released to the public upon request. Response to SHIKANY-25 The commenter states that there is no discussion regarding what public agencies with jurisdiction over potentially impacted resources were consulted about this project prior to completion of the initial study. Response to SHIKANY-26 This commenter states that the proposed project could have significant adverse permanent effects and will preclude reestablishment of existing habitat. The commenter further states that the Draft IS/MND only addresses temporary construction impacts, and not permanent adverse impacts. This introductory statement is noted. No response is warranted. 21 Response to SHIKANY-27 This commenter states that there is no analysis of the impacts of noise, lights, and other residential activities on what habitat and wildlife will remain, as well as on reestablishment of destroyed habitat (for example, residential uses leave no room for replanting of removed trees.). The impact of noise, lights, and other residential activities are addressed in the BRA Addendum and the Draft IS/MND. Site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor through trespass, impacts associated with lighting and structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics-1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, to be oriented down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements to be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off-site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Mitigation Measure Biology-6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. Mitigation Measure Biology-2 requires on-site replacement of trees removed at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with trees spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits. Tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology-7 prescribes the planting of Valley Oak Woodlan d species within all on-site undeveloped areas. Project design includes the avoidance of approximately 30 percent of the on-site trees, all other trees will be replaced. Implementation of the project design (including avoidance measures) and the two abovementioned mitigation measures minimize impacts to on-site trees and woodlands through avoidance and replacement, which reduces the magnitude of permanent tree/habitat removal. Response to SHIKANY-28 The commenter states that there is no analysis or mitigation to address likely intrusions by residents into the riparian corridor that would be facilitated by the close proximity of proposed homes with shallow rear yards to the riparian corridor. A thorough analysis of ongoing residential impacts must be provided. Please see Response to SHIKANY-27, above. Response to SHIKANY-29 The commenter states that the habitat types listed add up to 2.61 acres, yet the project site is listed as 3.05 acres. What is occurring on the missing 0.44 acre? Land Cover Types listed include 3.05 acres of Developed Land, Mixed Woodland, Valley Oak Woodland, and Riparian Woodland. The breakdown of the acreage is provided below: • Developed (.21 acre) • Mixed Woodland (0.62 acre) 22 • Valley Oak Woodland (1.18 acres) • Riparian Woodland (1.01 acres) Response to SHIKANY-30 The commenter asks how avoidance measures reference in Mitigation Measure Biology-1 will be implemented in the case that rare plants are found. They also ask what is proposed to be done with salvaged seed or root stock, given the development in the surrounding area. They ask if vegetation replacement for sensitive plants would occur in the riparian corridor. Mitigation Measure Biology-1 states that if CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol- level rare plant surveys, salvage of seed and/or root stock shall be conducted under the direction a qualified Botanist and in coordination with a qualified plant conservation institution or native nursery. Impacts to special-status species will be avoided through salvage of seeds or individual plants (root stock) in coordination with a qualified institution capable of propagating these species for planting off- site in protected environs. In addition, if CNPS-Ranked species are observed on-site during protocol-level rare plant surveys, the project proponent proposes to prepare a plan to accomplish salvage and relocation/replacement that states methods of salvage, storage, and replacement planting of seeds or plants, and to identify receptor sites, set target numbers to be established, describe monitoring methods, and define requirements for maintenance and annual monitoring reports. Regardless, protocol rare plant surveys were conducted in 2023 by JMC Botanist Haley Henderson resulted in negative findings for rare plants. Ms. Henderson conducted appropriately timed focused floristic surveys on March 23, May 9, and June 8, 2023. Surveys were conducted to ensure that the primary bloom window was covered for each of the regionally known special-status plant species with potentially suitable habitat on the project site. No special-status plant species were observed during these focused floristic surveys, or previously conducted general site surveys. Response to SHIKANY-31 The commenter states that the language in Mitigation Measure Biology-2, which requires replacement of on-site riparian woodland and Valley Oak Woodland to the greats extent practicable, contains nebulous language and asks the following questions: What determines what is or is not practicable? Will the developer be allowed to argue that it is not practicable to replace any of the trees, or half of the trees? Mitigation Measure Biology 2 calls for trees removed from the riparian woodland to be “replaced in-kind and on-site to the greatest extent practicable.” The practicability of in-kind and on-site planting is the issue to be considered, not the replacement ratio. Best practice for native planting is to source from local nurseries to preserve local genetics and avoid diseased/stressed plants. As such, if specific species are not available at the time of planting (which occasionally occurs for species such as the native Black Walnut (Juglans hindsii), alternative native riparian species would be installed instead. In addition, a tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. 23 Response to SHIKANY-32 The commenter states that project mitigation should call for avoidance of removing the habitat on the project site by removing multiple lots from the development. Please see Response to SHIKANY-27, above. Response to SHIKANY-33 The commenter states that the County is not obligated to allow the proposed density and that CEQA requires avoidance as a first step in mitigating project impacts. Please see Response to SHIKANY-27, above. Response to SHIKANY-34 The commenter asks where the 158 trees being replace will be planted. They note that replacement trees in the riparian corridor would need to be evaluated for impacts to the existing habitat. They question the feasibility of planting replacement trees on-site. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes that planted trees shall be spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits. A tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. Response to SHIKANY-35 The commenter lists reasons that Mitigation Measure Biology-2 is not achievable. The majority of the project site is regularly disked, occurs within a matrix of suburban development, and includes existing on-site residential development. Mitigation Measure Biology-2 requires on-site replacement of trees removed at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees, with trees spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits. Tree replacement plan and landscape plan will be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect and provided to the County prior to issuance of building permits, documenting practicability of planting replacement trees on-site. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology-7 prescribes the planting of Valley Oak Woodl and species within all on-site undeveloped areas. Multiple trees on the project site will be preserved and others will be replaced. Implementation of the project design (including avoidance measures) and the two abovementioned mitigation measures minimize impacts to on-site trees and woodlands through replacement plantings, which reduces the magnitude of permanent tree/habitat removal. Response to SHIKANY-36 The commenter states that the impact of removing the trees must be analyzed and location of replacement trees must be documented. They state that it must be documented how trees will be protected from removal. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35, above. 24 Response to SHIKANY-37 This comment lists performance standards that must be included in Mitigation Measure Biology 2. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35, above. In addition, the trees planted as mitigation would be monitored, maintained, and replaced as needed. Recorded Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will provide a perpetual source of funding and responsibility for the trees. The required annual inspection (to be conducted prior to October 1 every year), ongoing maintenance, and the requirement to provide for the replacement of the mitigation trees will be included in the CC&Rs recorded against each of the proposed properties. A copy of the CC&R(s) will be provided to the County prior to installation of the permanent fencing. Response to SHIKANY-38 This comment states that Mitigation Measure Biology-2 does not reduce the impact of the tree removal below of threshold of significance. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35, above. Response to SHIKANY-39 The commenter states that Mitigation Measure Biology-2 lacks performance standards specifying what is required if pond turtles are found. If western pond turtles are found during construction activities, they shall be moved by a qualified Biologist to the portion of the riparian corridor that will not be subjected to project activities. Response to SHIKANY-40 The commenter states that, while Mitigation Measure Biology-5 mentions exclusion fencing to mitigate impacts to western pond turtles, it specifies amphibians but does not specify reptiles when referring to site monitoring and what must occur if special-status reptiles (whip snake are found). If Alameda whipsnake are found during construction activities, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) shall be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. Response to SHIKANY-41 The commenter states that Mitigation Measure Biology-4 and Mitigation Measure Biology-5 should be rewritten to be very clear about what must occur regarding special-status amphibians and reptiles. If Alameda whipsnake are found during construction activities, the USFWS and CDFW shall be consulted to approve capture and relocation by a qualified Biologist. Response to SHIKANY-42 The commenter states that replanting oak woodland in the riparian corridor would be inappropriate. They state that several lots of the proposed project must be removed in order to fulfill Mitigation Measure Biology-7. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35, above. 25 Response to SHIKANY-43 The commenter states that tree cutting resulting in deposition of debris in the creek channel occurred while the developer was working on permitting the subdivision, as reported by adjoining neighbors. The commenter states that the Arborist Report, the BRA, and the MND do not address this. The commenter asks if this was considered when the biological report was updated in 2022. As approved by the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development on October 28, 2021, a single dead Monterey pine tree that was considered a safety hazard was removed from the site. Removal of this dead tree was not done as part of project activities. Response to SHIKANY-44 The commenter states that tree cutting occurred after preparation of an Arborist Report in May 2020. They state that neither Arborist Report, nor the biological report or the Draft IS/MND documents the removal of these trees. They state that CEQA requires that early tree removal be included as part of the Draft IS/MND analysis. They mention that appropriate violations must be issued if the trees were removed without a permit, and mitigation for the loss of the trees must be required. See Response to SHIKANY-43. Response to SHIKANY-45 The commenter states that several oak trees in the riparian corridor would be removed and questions whether some of these trees can be retained, per recommendations of the Arborist Report. The proposed project was designed to accommodate a 50-foot creek setback to avoid impacts to the adjacent Grayson Creek to the greatest extent feasible, including the avoidance of trees within the riparian corridor. This setback is on average significantly wider than that observed on the southern side of Grayson Creek in proximity to the project site. Because of the strong phototropism exhibited by several of the riparian trees, which have clearly expanded beyond the resources provided within the footprint of the Grayson Creek channel and abutting uplands, the potential root zone of these trees may be impacted by construction of project elements occurring outside of the creek setback, and accordingly, their removal was recommended by the Arborist. Tree No. 136 is a non-native silver dollar eucalyptus (Eucalyptus cinerea) with a failed trunk, and tree No. 194 and No. 195 are dying Siberian elms (Ulmus sp.). These trees are recommended for removal by the Arborist due to health and location within the grading limits. Regardless, non-native trees in poor health should not be part of a preserved riparian corridor that would be subject to restoration efforts. Trees No. 137 and No. 138 are native oaks that occur very adjacent to the top of bank of Grayson Creek and the proposed project was designed to avoid trees such as these. While native oaks, tree No. 114, No. 115, No. 116, No. 169, and NO. 169b occur approximately between 50 and 80+ feet beyond the centerline of Grayson Creek, making project planning of to avoid impacts to these trees (including their root systems) infeasible. If it is determined that additional native trees can be protected in place while still achieving project objectives (as determined by the project Arborist in coordination with the Construction Manager and the 26 project proponent), the project proponent will determine if additional trees can be saved based upon the potential impacts from the grading to the root structure of the trees by “field-fit” grading activities to the greatest extent practicable to conduct such avoidance. Response to SHIKANY-46 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND contains no description of how the riparian setback was established, and no description of the width of the riparian setback from the creek channel, centerline, or from the top of bank. They state that neither the creek centerline nor the top of bank are shown on the development plans. In some areas, the extent of riparian canopy extends far beyond the top of bank of Grayson Creek (such as in the southwestern corner of the project site), while in others, the riparian canopy is minimal and the top of bank is beyond the extent of riparian canopy. It appears the commentor is equating the riparian corridor and the creek structure setback; however, these are not equivalent. The County does not require a “riparian setback.” However, the project design incorporates a required 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. The centerline of Grayson creek is depicted and labeled on the development plans. Response to SHIKANY-47 The commenter states that Figure 11 of the Biological Report shows the top of bank either commensurate with or extending beyond the riparian setback, which apparently is the drip line of the trees that were determined to comprise the northerly boundary of the riparian corridor. The commenter cites Policy 8.89 of the General Plan Conservation Element requires a minimum 50-foot setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek. The commenter asks how the proposed riparian setback compares to the minimum 50-foot setback. In some areas, the extent of riparian canopy extends far beyond the top of bank of Grayson Creek (such as in the southwestern corner of the project site), while in others, the riparian canopy is minimal and the top of bank is beyond the extent of riparian canopy. It appears the commentor is equating the riparian corridor and the creek structure setback; however, these are not equivalent. The County does not require a “riparian setback.” However, the project design incorporates a required 50-foot creek setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. The centerline of Grayson Creek is depicted and labeled on the development plans. Response to SHIKANY-48 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND needs to clarify the difference between the riparian setback area and the creek structure setback line, and what can occur within each area. The proposed project includes a single setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek to avoid impacts to Grayson Creek. This setback includes the restriction of construction of aboveground permanent elements such as roads/driveways and structures to be a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of Grayson Creek. While project implementation would require grading and tree removal within the riparian corridor, all grading activities are proposed to remain well outside of top of bank (a minimum of 20 feet). The County’s Creek Structure Setback requires a setback that is defined as a point where a line 27 with slope of 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical, extending from the toe of the channel, intersects the existing ground plus 30 feet horizontal. Response to SHIKANY-49 The commenter states that the project plans show the limit of the riparian area with a note that no grading will be allowed and that beyond that line, the plans show the creek structure setback line. They state that this means grading is allowed up to and below the top of the creek bank, which they state is inappropriate and requires extension of the riparian setback area to a point beyond the top of bank. See Response to SHIKANY-48. Response to SHIKANY-50 The commenter reiterates that the project plans do not clearly show the creek centerline nor the top of bank and needs to be remedied. See Response to SHIKANY-48. Response to SHIKANY-51 The commenter states that it currently does not appear the riparian setback is sufficient to protect Grayson Creek since grading would be allowed beyond the top of bank outside the riparian setback, and tree canopy is being removed within the riparian corridor. Without the riparian setback line extending well beyond the top of bank, which is not what is being proposed, Grayson Creek is left vulnerable to both construction and residential activities. See Response to SHIKANY-48. Response to SHIKANY-52 The commenter asks if the County has determined that Grayson Creek, or the portion within the proposed subdivision, is a “protected watercourse” and if it requires protection pursuant to County Code Section 914-4.002. The commenter asks for a rationale if it is not protected. Grayson Creek is not identified as a “protected watercourse” within any publicly available maps, reports, or databases. Response to SHIKANY-53 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND does not address impacts associated with the establishment and ongoing activities of permanent residential uses close to Grayson Creek and does not address that the proposed residential lots include the riparian area. They state that due to the setback waivers coupled with the number of lots proposed, there is little rear yard on the majority of the lots, which could encourage the use of the riparian area as part of the homes backyards. Site occupation has the potential to impact the adjacent riparian corridor through trespass, impacts associated with lighting and structure aesthetics, and stormwater runoff. Project plans include isolation of the residential lots from the riparian corridor through installation of permanent fencing along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. Mitigation Measure Aesthetics-1 includes requirements for all outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and street lights, to be oriented 28 down, onto the project site or road, and back shields or functionally similar design elements to be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off-site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Mitigation Measure Biology-6 includes the implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure there are no impacts to water quality in Grayson Creek resulting from project construction or post-construction stormwater runoff. Response to SHIKANY-54 The commenter states that a permanent fence was previously proposed by Mitigation Measure Biology- 6, but is no longer included as a mitigation measure. The comment asks how the County would ensure that future property owners do not extend their backyards into the protection riparian area. The proposed project would incorporate a permanent fence along the southern/eastern boundary of the developed site. As this fence is part of project plans, it is no longer considered a mitigation measure. Response to SHIKANY-55 The commenter states that the proposed fence was described as “wildlife friendly,” but that there was no clear definition of wildlife friendly. See Response to SHIKANY-55. Response to SHIKANY-56 The commenter states that the riparian area is based on the drip line of trees in the riparian corridor, and that the line defining the riparian corridor is very jagged, making the location of the fence unclear. See Response to SHIKANY-55. Response to SHIKANY-57 The commenter states that, while issues with the fence must be addressed, the fence should still be included as a mitigation measure to protect the riparian area. The commenter questions why the fence was removed and questions how the County intends to protect the riparian area from extension of the proposed lots. See Response to SHIKANY-55. Response to SHIKANY-58 The commenter states that it appears that a deed restriction of the creek structure setback is no longer required by Mitigation Measure Biology-6 and asks for clarification. All the properties within the creek structure setback would be subject to deed restrictions (as required by County Code and as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map) prohibiting the property owners from developing the portion of their properties occurring within the setback, including the construction of permanent structures such as ADUs, pools, fences, etc. Response to SHIKANY-59 The commenter states that impacts to Grayson Creek and the riparian corridor are not mitigated below a threshold of significance. 29 Please see Response to SHIKANY-34, SHIKANY-35, and SHIKANY-42, above. Response to SHIKANY-60 The commenter states that the less than significant impact to State and federally protected wetlands is based on a number of project features that are not adequate. No State or federally protected wetlands occur within the development area of the project site. While project implementation would result in impacts to the riparian corridor associated with Grayson Creek, it would avoid direct impacts (fill or modification) to Grayson Creek. Response to SHIKANY-61 The commenter speculates that future homeowners will unlawfully expand their backyards into the deed-restricted creek structure set back. The commenter asks how expansion of backyards into the setback area will be monitored and prevented. The commenter speculates that future homeowners will unlawfully expand their backyards into the deed-restricted creek structure set back. There is no basis provided for this speculative assertion, and while many of the existing homes along Grayson Creek include swimming pools and backyard improvements that are much closer to the Creek than the proposed project. The proposed project would include an enforceable deed restriction in addition to local land use controls to prevent unauthorized land uses. No further measures are necessary. Response to SHIKANY-62 The commenter states that Sheet 4 of the development plans provides some information as to how the creek structure setback was calculated. They say it appears that only one cross-section was provided at the east end of Grayson Creek with six cross-sections on the westerly end and that there are no cross- sections in the middle of this stretch of creek. They ask the basis for the location of the cross-sections, how the number and location of cross-sections was determined to be adequate for the establishment of the structure setback lines, and how it was determined that the entire creek section is adequately represented by these cross-sections. The minimum extent of the creek structure setback was calculated from the top of bank, which was determined in accordance with Title 9, Division 914 (§§ 914-14.010, 914-14.012, 914-14.014) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Because the height of the TOB is less than 20 feet above the channel invert, the required horizontal distance between top of bank and the setback line is 30 feet. The entire creek corridor was mapped to determine the extent of top of bank, and accordingly the extent of the creek structure setback. While the creek structure set back was determined by location the top of bank, functionally the creek structure setback occurs at a minimum of 50 feet from the centerline of the Grayson Creek channel. Response to SHIKANY-63 The commenter states that County Code Section 914-14.012(d) states that where significant riparian vegetation exists beyond the limits required by Section (c) of this same section (the limits the subdivision utilizes), the County may extend the setback line to include such areas. The commenter asks what the basis was for not requiring this additional area, given the number of oaks and other trees that are 30 proposed to be removed, since the trees being removed have crowns that are part of the riparian canopy? See Response to SHIKANY-13, SHIKANY-14, SHIKANY-16, SHIKANY-46, SHIKANY-47, SHIKANY-48, and SHIKANY-62. Response to SHIKANY-64 The commenter states that, while the Draft IS/MND properly notes that the Grayson Creek riparian area serves as a wildlife corridor and provides wildlife nursey sites, it does not acknowledge that the oak woodland provides nesting habitat for migrating birds and other wildlife that utilizes the property. As stated in Section 3.4 of the BRA Addendum, a nursery site is an area where juveniles occur at higher densities, avoid predation more successfully, or grow faster there than in a different habitat (Beck et al. 2001). While the project site is regularly disked, the trees, shrubs, and structures occurring on-site as well as the Grayson Creek riparian corridor have been identified as supporting suitable habitat for nesting birds and roosting bats. However, it is presumed that the Grayson Creek riparian habitat would act as a wildlife nursery due to the combination of presence of suitable nesting/roosting habitat and the creek corridor’s protected nature. Regardless, Mitigation Measures Biology-2, Biology-3, Biology-4, Biology-5, and Biology-8, which requires tree replacement for riparian trees removed from the project site, pre-construction surveys for dispersing, roosting, and/or nesting wildlife, installation of wildlife exclusion fencing, and implementing post-construction measures for protection of the riparian corridor from site occupation would reduce impacts to nursery sites as well as all nesting, roosting, and dispersing wildlife. Response to SHIKANY-65 The commenter asks how the removal of most of the existing habitat on the site and development of residential uses with a narrow riparian corridor would not impede use of wildlife corridors and nursey sites located at the project site. They ask if the 0.8 acre of riparian corridor that would remain would be sufficient to address all current wildlife migration and nursery uses on the project site, even though it would have residential uses directly adjacent to it. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor has been identified as a potential wildlife corridor and nursery site; the remainder of the project site has not been identified as either a wildlife corridor or a nursery site. The Grayson Creek riparian corridor would remain largely untouched by implementation of the proposed project, with the exception of construction within 0.21 acre of riparian habitat (necessitating riparian tree removal along its northern boundary) and implementation of a riparian tree planting plan to mitigate impacts to trees. Response to SHIKANY-66 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND is missing information regarding the connectivity of Grayson Creek with off-site portions of watercourse and habitats for fish. The proposed project would not alter Grayson Creek or interfere with the movement of off-site wildlife through the portion of Grayson Creek that is located on the project site. The comment does not provide 31 any basis for finding the proposed project would impact special-status species wildlife movement through the site. In addition, please see Response to SHIKANY-65, above. Response to SHIKANY-67 The commenter states that Mitigation Measure Biology-2 through Biology-6 call for tree replacement, but that the requirement is unachievable. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35, above. Response to SHIKANY-68 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND does not include post-construction measures for protection of the riparian area. Please see Response to SHIKANY-53. Response to SHIKANY-69 The commenter states that the previous MND required fencing along the riparian boundary and a deed restriction of the creek structure setback area prohibiting development. Please see Response to SHIKANY-58 and SHIKANY-61. Response to SHIKANY-70 The commenter states that the proposed project poses a potentially significant impact to the movement of wildlife, and the less than significant impact conclusion in the Draft IS/MND is not fully supported. Please see Response to SHIKANY-53. Response to SHIKANY-71 The commenter states that the discussion of wildlife impacts does not mention CEQA Section 21083.4 regarding the protection and mitigation of impacts to oak woodland. CEQA Section 21083.4 requires that the County determine whether a project within its jurisdiction may result in a conversion of oak woodlands that will have a significant effect on the environment and allows for the County to develop suitable measures to mitigate those impacts as well as the mitigation of impacts to oak woodland through the planting of “an appropriate number of trees.” Mitigation Measure Biology 2 called for the replacement of native trees at a 3:1 ratio and the non-native trees at a 1:1 ratio and is consistent with County practice and implementation of its tree protection and preservation ordinance. The IS/MND evaluates the project’s potential impacts to all County-protected trees, including oak woodlands as required under Section 21083.4 of the Public Resources Code. The IS/MND includes planting an “appropriate number of trees” and a replacement tree planting plan. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 calls for the replacement of native trees at a 3:1 ratio and the non-native trees at a 1:1 ratio, and implementation of the Arborist-prepared Tree Preservation Guidelines. The MND is consistent with Public Resources Code 21083.4 and no further mitigation through project redesign is necessary. 32 Response to SHIKANY-72 The commenter states that General Plan Policy 8-6 requires significant trees to be preserved, yet over 72 percent of the 117 trees on-site will be removed and 17 of the remaining trees will be subject to dripline encroachment. The commenter states that the project does not preserve significant trees and vegetation. The project design includes retention and preservation of the greatest number of trees practicable. Mitigation Measure Biology 9 calls for trees retained and preserved, but subjected to dripline encroachment, to be monitoring by the project Arborist during encroachment and all damage to trees scheduled for preservation will be appropriately mitigated. Response to SHIKANY-73 The commenter states that tree replacement is impossible at the rate required by General Plan Policy 8- 12 and that the proposed residential lots should be reduced by half to mitigate this impact. It states that the proposed project currently violates General Plan policies and has a significant and unavoidable impact on existing woodland habitat. Please see Responses to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35, above. Response to SHIKANY-74 The commenter states that the proposed project does not preserve natural vegetation and wildlife, conflicting with policies listed in the Draft IS/MND. They state that a portion of riparian woodland and all of the oak and mixed woodland will be destroyed, grading will occur over the top bank of Grayson Creek, rear yards, rear yards would be extremely small and in close proximity to the riparian boundary, and that the proposed reestablishment of habitat is not possible. They state that all of this is in violation with General Plan policies. This comment reiterates previous comments. No additional response is warranted. Response to SHIKANY-75 The commenter states that trees have already been removed from the project site, but this is not discussed or properly documented. Please see Response to SHIKANY-44, above. Response to SHIKANY-76 The commenter explains that one of the reasons tree removal can be approved according to County Code is “reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot.” The commenter asks what determines “reasonable development” and states that the proposed project could utilize smaller development footprints to avoid such extensive tree and habitat removal. The proposed project has been designed to avoid impacts to natural habitats and resources where feasible. Project design elements include incorporating a structure setback from the centerline of Grayson Creek of a minimum of 50 feet, as well as avoidance and preservation of many trees and tree clusters, and isolation of the residential development from the preserved riparian corridor. 33 Response to SHIKANY-77 The commenter states that CEQA requires avoidance of environmental impacts as a first step, but that there seems to be no consideration or discussion of how removal of trees or habitat could be avoided, nor any justification provided for their removal. The commenter states that the density of the proposed project needs to be significantly reduced. See Response to SHIKANY-76 Response to SHIKANY-78 The comment states that the neighborhood does not have adequate bike lanes and sidewalks to travel to a nearby commercial district and the Pleasant Hill Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station, and states that walking on Grayson Road is dangerous given the excessive traffic. The comment further questions if there is a bike lane that fully connects to the Pleasant Hill BART station. The Draft IS/MND thoroughly evaluated potential safety issues that would result from the proposed project. The proposed project would comply with applicable County General Plan policies outlined in the Public Safety Element. The applicant would install bicycle land striping as part of the proposed project. Furthermore, there is no sidewalk to the east for over 1,000 feet and no bike lanes or sidewalks that fully connects to the Pleasant Hill BART station which is over 3.5 miles to the east. Response to SHIKANY-79 The comment states that the proposed waiver for the construction of sidewalks on the proposed project’s frontage to Grayson Road is inappropriate given that the proposed project’s density would create an increased need for sidewalks along Grayson Road. The comment adds that if sidewalks are developed in the area in the future, they would be unjustifiably installed at taxpayer expense. Furthermore, the comment states that statements made in Draft IS/MND, Section 2.6, Energy, regarding the project site being within walkable distance to a commercial distance, thus saving energy, to be disingenuous. As stated in Response to SHIKANY-8, pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence of any of the following: a) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. b) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households. c) The concession or incentive would be contrary to State or federal law. None of these conditions apply, meaning that the County cannot reject the requested concession. 34 The County recognizes that encouraging pedestrian transit reduces energy consumption in its Climate Action Plan (CAP). Response to SHIKANY-80 The comment states that fire risk in the project area is high and contains significant vegetation and overhead power lines. The comment asks if power lines will be undergrounded on the project site. The comment further states that overhead power lines and vegetation surrounding the project site pose a risk regardless of the proposed project undergrounding power lines on-site. Section 2.19, Wildfire, of the Draft IS/MND, found the site to be within a designated High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and conducted an analysis of the proposed project’s fire risk accordingly. The analysis found that the proposed project would comply with the California Fire Code and California Building Standards Code to ensure that proposed development contains appropriate fire protections, and would be reviewed by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) and other interested fire protection agencies in accordance with County General Plan Measure 7-au. General Plan Measure 7-au would also require the County to set Conditions of Approval as recommended by the CCCFPD’s review. The Draft IS/MND determined that all new utility infrastructure that would serve the proposed project would be undergrounded, minimizing potential impacts to fire risk. Furthermore, Section 2.19, Wildfire, analyzes vegetation risk to wildfire as well, and determined that the proposed project would be subject to the CCCFPD Ordinance, which would include design standards and management regulations such as weed abatement and brush clearance regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. As such, impacts from on-site vegetation on fire risk would be minimized to a less than significant level. Lastly, adjacent existing overhead power lines constitute the existing conditions of the project area and would not be altered by the proposed project. As such, wildfire risks related to these overhead power lines would not be affected by the proposed project and are thus not within the scope of the Draft IS/MND’s environmental analysis. No further response is required. Response to SHIKANY-81 The comment states that vegetation on the project site and in the surrounding area is atypical of urban areas. The comment argues that reduced yard setbacks, proposed high density development, and the placement of proposed development next to wooded areas would result in a high fire risk that could easily spread between proposed and existing houses. See Response to SHIKANY-80. Response to SHIKANY-82 The commenter states that the claim in the Draft IS/MND that fire risk will be reduced to vegetation removal demonstrates that the County is not committed to re-establishing habitats that would be removed as a result of the proposed project. The commenter questions whether the County actually intends to enforce the replacement mitigation. 35 Please see Response to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35. Furthermore, As stated in Mitigation Measure Biology 2, the proposed project would be required to submit a tree replacement plan and a landscape plan prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect, which would be prepared in compliance with the 2022 California Fire Code (CFC). The CFC includes specific requirements regarding fire-resistant landscaping and fire-resistant vegetation. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 states that most of the replacement trees would be various species of oak tree, which are considered fire-resistant trees, per the CFC. Tree replacement at the project site would not increase the risk of wildfire because it would be designed in compliance with the CFC and would adhere to the tree replacement and landscape plans required by Mitigation Measure Biology 2. The County would be legally bound to fulfill all requirements described in Mitigation Measure Biology 2. The County’s compliance with the CFC is mandatory as it is required by State law. Response to SHIKANY-83 The commenter states that it is unclear whether the required tree replacement is possible at the project site. The commenter states that the claim that fire risk will be reduced as a result of vegetation removal is incorrect and in direct conflict with the requirement to replant this vegetation. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34, SHIKANY-35, and SHIKANY-82. Response to SHIKANY-84 The comment states that Section 2.19, Wildfire, does not address the increased fire risk brought to the entire County due to climate change and ongoing drought. As such, the comment finds it inappropriate to increase density on the project site. The comment pertaining to fire risk increases throughout the County due to climate change and ongoing drought are speculative and therefore outside the scope of this Draft IS/MND. The comment does not provide any specific information related to whether the proposed project would materially affect evacuation routes in the area or impact any existing wildfire issues. Draft IS/MND Section 2.19, Wildfire, determined that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to fire risk. See Response to SHIKANY-80 for further information. Response to SHIKANY-85 The comment states that the proposed project would interfere with the groundwater supplies and recharge given the increase of impervious surfaces the project proposes and given the direction of stormwater runoff from impermeable surfaces into the storm drain system. The comment further states that the Draft IS/MND contains incongruencies in its analysis of groundwater impacts, stating that the proposed bioretention basin was found to simultaneously maintain existing groundwater recharge on- site and yet also drain into the public storm drainage system. As such, the comment states that the proposed project would not retain the existing groundwater recharge. As shown in the proposed project’s Hydrology and Stormwater Control Plan, the proposed bioretention basin would be constructed as a flow-through planter following specifications found in the County Clean Water Program Technical Guidance Handbook. As such, a portion of stormwater runoff flowing through the bioretention basin would permeate through the basin and provide groundwater recharge, and the other portion of stormwater would continue into the public stormwater drainage system. Therefore, the 36 analysis made in Section 2.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Draft IS/MND is correct, and impacts pertaining to groundwater recharge from implementation of the proposed project are less than significant. Response to SHIKANY-86 The commenter is concerned that the proposed project could impact the amount of stormwater runoff feeding into Grayson Creek and change the drainage pattern of the project site. The proposed project stormwater runoff would not increase the peak flow rates from the added impervious surface area as a result of the biofiltration basin proposed for the project. Post-Development runoff of the proposed project would match or reduce the pre-development existing flow rate of 3.4 cubic feet per second (cfs). The 10-year hydrograph was plotted against the allowable flow rate of 3.4 cfs to establish the detention requirement. Based on these parameters, a required detention volume of 555 cubic feet has been determined. The proposed project would contain a biofiltration basin located at the eastern edge of the property that would contain a volume of 674 cubic feet, 119 cubic feet larger than required to match the existing 10-year hydrograph. Response to SHIKANY-87 The comment asserts that the County’s density calculation is incorrect, stating that the County used 2.99 dwelling units per acre rather than 2.9 as stated in the Draft IS/MND resulting in 8.28 units per acre, rounded to nine base units for this subdivision. The calculation was based on a net acreage of 2.76, which was calculated by subtracting the private right-of-way proposed for this project from the total project site acreage. According to the comment, Table 3 -4 of the County General Plan Land Use Element states that “net acreage includes all land area used exclusively for residential purposes, and excludes streets, highways, and all other public right-of-way. Net acreage is assumed to constitute 75 percent of gross acreage for all uses except for the Multi-Family designations.” The comment states that 75 percent of the project site gross acreage results in 2.29 net acres, not 2.76 net acres. As such, the comment concludes that the density calculations for the project site should be 2.29 net acres multiplied by 2.99 dwelling units per acre, resulting in seven base units allowed on the project site. Therefore, the commenter concludes that a 15 percent density bonus increase would only allow for eight dwelling units on-site. The comment further states that even this number is too dense. The County’s General Plan states that the General Plan land use designapons are closely related to the density requirements defined in the County's Zoning Ordinance, and are continuous, without gaps, across the density range. For example, the density requirements of units per net acre for the Single- Family Residential-Very Low (0.2 -0.9) and Single-Family Residential-Low (1.0-2.9) designations mean that the very low designation will allow for densities ranging from 0.2 units per net acre up to but not including 1.0 units per net acre.” In this instance, Single-Family Low allows densipes from 1.0 units an acre, to 2.9 an acre, with the maximum being a number that is less than 3.0. The complete definition of “Net Acreage” from the General Plan is as follows: “Net acreage includes all land area used exclusively for residential purposes, and excludes streets, highways, and all other public right-of-way.” 0.29 acres have been deducted for the proposed street. No other street, highway or public rights-of-way exist on the subject property. As a result the commentor’s calculations are inaccurate and not consistent with the County’s General Plan. 37 Additionally, the Density Bonus Law defines base density as “gross density” (Government Code § 65915(f)). Assembly Bill (AB) 2501, a bill signed into law in 2016, clarified that a "density bonus" means an increase over the maximum allowable gross residential density. Moreover, the Density Bonus Law states that it “shall be interpreted liberally in favor of producing the maximum number of total housing units” (Government Code § 65915(r)). Therefore, under the Density Bonus Law the City must honor the applicant’s request to utilize the gross acreage of the parcel and the associated calculation of the maximum allowable gross density. The calculation must be based upon the total acreage of the project site and not reduced by the required City roadway dedications. Response to SHIKANY-88 The comment restates that net average calculations for the proposed project are incorrect, finding that 0.29 acre for the street and 1.5 deed-restricted acres for the Grayson Creek structure setback area would need to be removed from the project site’s gross area for an accurate net acreage calculation. Response to SHIKANY-89 The commenter states that a mitigation measure requiring a creek structure setback area be protected from development via a permanent deed restriction and dedication of development rights to the County should be added back to the Draft IS/MND. Please see Response to SHIKANY-58. Response to SHIKANY-90 The comment states that the 1.5 deed-restricted acres for Grayson Creek should be removed from the gross acreage as well to form the net acreage of the proposed project. The comment calculates that the proposed project’s net acreage would be 1.26 acres with this additional removal, and would have a maximum allowed density of four base units. With the application of the Density Bonus Law for one middle-income housing unit, the project site should only allow for a density of approximately five units per acre. Response to SHIKANY-91 The comment states that net acreage should be recalculated according to Response to SHIKANY-88 and SHIKANY-90. Upon recalculation, the comment requests that all Density Bonus Law waivers and concessions be revisited for their need. See Response to SHIKANY-88 regarding the response to net acreage recalculation for the proposed project. Response to SHIKANY-92 The comment states that given the number of lots, the waiver on lot width creates lot widths completely inconsistent with the surrounding area. As explained in Draft IS/MND Section 2.11, Land Use and Planning, the minimum lot size, lot width, depth, retaining wall setbacks, and front and side yard setbacks for the R-15 zoning designation would physically preclude the development of the project at the proposed density. As such, the proposed project is granted a waiver by the State Density Bonus Law. 38 Response to SHIKANY-93 The commenter states that the proposed project does not allow enough space to replant 158 large trees. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34 and SHIKANY-35. Response to SHIKANY-94 The comment states that the proposed project’s curb, gutter, and sidewalk Density Bonus Law waivers pose a safety concern. See Responses to SHIKANY-8 and SHIKANY-79 regarding safety on sidewalk improvements. Response to SHIKANY-95 The comment requests clarification on the need for setback requirement waiver for retaining walls. The comment asks where these retaining walls would be located. As stated in Response to SHIKANY-92, waivers to the R-15 zoning designation are provided under State Density Bonus Law if a project is physically precluded from occurring due to zoning requirements, as is the case with the setback requirement for retaining walls. An additional exhibit illustrating the location of the retaining walls is provided in the Final IS/MND. As described previously, pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence of any of the following: a) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. b) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households. c) The concession or incentive would be contrary to State or federal law. None of these conditions apply, and the County would be required to approve this concession. Response to SHIKANY-96 The comment states that the baseline density stated by the Draft IS/MND of the project site, nine dwelling units, would not be able to meet R-15 zoning requirements for lot size, lot width, and setbacks. As such, the comment states that the project site’s baseline density would be illegal and cannot be considered. The comment is noted. See Response to SHIKANY-17. Response to SHIKANY-97 The comment questions how the County concluded that the inclusion of a moderate-income affordable lot into the proposed project drives the need for Density Bonus Law waivers when development standard waivers would still need to be in place to feasibly develop nine units, the established baseline 39 density, on the project site. The comment also requests an explanation for the application of development standard waivers for all lots, and not just the proposed affordable unit lot. Without waivers, the proposed project would be allowed to develop eight units on the project site. It is assumed that the comment meant to write that eight units are the established baseline density. Because the proposed project is providing one moderate-income unit, it is allowed a 7 percent density bonus, allowing for nine units at the project site. Additionally, the Density Bonus Law allows waivers and concessions to R-15 zoning standards because an increased density often physically preclude a project from following all design standards for its land use and zoning designations. These waivers apply to all development in the proposed project to accommodate the increase in density permitted by the State Density Bonus Law, not solely to the proposed affordable housing. Response to SHIKANY-98 The comment states that waivers can only be granted if they result in no impacts to public health or safety. The comment explains that the waiver of sidewalk requirements on Grayson Road would negatively impact the public health and safety, particularly when the Draft IS/MND analyzes that the proposed project is within walking distance to nearby commercial districts. The comment requests an explanation of how the County intends to make the finding that the waiver for sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road does not harm public health and safety. See Response to SHIKANY-8 regarding public safety from potential sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road. Response to SHIKANY-99 The comment states that the inclusion of moderate-income housing into the proposed project is solely to maximize the proposed project’s density. Additionally, the comment finds that the proposed project’s waivers and concessions are made with the intention to facilitate more high-end housing, not create affordable housing. The comment further states that the proposed affordable unit is in the worst location and is the smallest lot and home in the subdivision and will reveal itself as being of a different income level to other proposed units. This comment addresses the project developer’s intentions regarding the Density Bonus Law and comments on the location of the affordable unit. These features are not relevant to the environmental analysis of the proposed project, and thus do not require a response. Response to SHIKANY-100 The comment asks if the County has received proof that the requested Density Bonus Law incentives and waivers are financially necessary to construct the proposed affordable unit. The Density Bonus Law requires that the County must waive any development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a qualifying project, pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(e)(1). As described previously, pursuant to the Density Bonus Law, the County can only reject the concession or incentive requested by the applicant if they make a written finding, based upon substantial evidence of any of the following: 40 a) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. b) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households. c) The concession or incentive would be contrary to State or federal law. None of these conditions apply, and the County would be required to approve the requested waivers and concession. See Response to SHIKANY-97 for additional information regarding the Density Bonus Law. Response to SHIKANY-101 The comment states that the proposed project would result in a project site subdivision with significant unmitigated impacts to public trust resources, as well as impacts resulting from a development completely out of character with its surroundings, due to its extremely high density. The comment questions if the County allows for the development of projects with significant impacts to public trust resources for the purpose of including one affordable unit. The comment does not state what significant unmitigated impacts from the proposed project would impact public trust resources, and thus no response can be given. Environmental impact concerns resulting from high density development are addressed in the prior and continuing responses. Response to SHIKANY-102 The comment states that the proposed project would contain impacts to the public’s health and safety that are against housing law. The comment questions how the County intends to address the health and safety impacts resulting from the density of the proposed project. The comment does not state what significant unmitigated impacts from the proposed project’s density would impact health and safety. However, various responses to prior and following comments address density-related concerns to public health and safety. Specifically, see Response to SHIKANY-8. Response to SHIKANY-103 The comment states that Table 1 of the Draft IS/MND, Contra Costa County Ordinance Code R-15 Requirements, is misleading, as it does not contain the developable area for each lot. The comment continues that the usable area of many of these lots is no more than approximately half the lot, and in the case of Lots 3, 4, and 5 may be less than half the listed lot size. The comment surmises that the proposed project would result in a subdivision with a density and visual appearance that is not appropriate for the project site. See Response to SHIKANY-19 for information on concerns regarding developable area for each proposed subdivision. Response to SHIKANY-104 The comment shows concern about the number of waivers and concessions that would be granted as part of the proposed project. The comment requests that the financial value of the waivers that would 41 be granted for the increased density and the waiver that excludes sidewalk improvements on the project site’s Grayson Road frontage, be weighed against the cost of these waivers to public resources, the loss of standard frontage improvement requirements, increased traffic impacts, the addition of one moderate-income home, and so forth. The comment surmises that granting the proposed waivers is against the public interest and should be limited or denied. Please see the various responses above that address the potential impacts of the proposed waivers to public resources, traffic, public health and safety, and affordable housing. Specifically, please see Response to SHIKANY-8, CEQA does not require the Draft IS/MND to analyze the financial values of environmental impacts and features of the proposed project. As such, no response is required. Response to SHIKANY-105 The comment requests for Mitigation Measure Noise-1 to be amended to have the County require the project developer or contractor to mail a notice to each nearby resident providing them with the planned hours of operation and who to contact if there are noise concerns. This comment does not address the adequacy of the Draft IS/MND. No response is required. Response to SHIKANY-106 The comment states that the hours of operation for noise-producing activities are excessive, and requests that noise-producing activities during the week conclude at 6:00 p.m. The comment also requests that Saturday noise-generating activities occur between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The comment concludes that noise-generating activities should be limited according to the project area’s quiet surrounding neighborhood. Proposed project construction would occur pursuant to the County Noise Ordinance. Response to SHIKANY-107 The comment reiterates concerns regarding the proposed waiver to frontage requirements on Grayson Road. The comment is specifically concerned about a precedent being set regarding the lack of sidewalk development on Grayson Road. The comment states that the existing fragmented sidewalks on Grayson Road, along with the increased traffic from the proposed project, would create a high risk to public health and safety, both to existing and potential new residents. The comment is also concerned about future frontage improvements requiring taxpayer funding rather than development funding. See Response to SHIKANY-8 regarding pedestrian safety and Grayson Road sidewalk improvements. Response to SHIKANY-108 The comment notes that while a sidewalk would not be developed on the project site’s Grayson Road frontage, the proposed project would develop a sidewalk as part of the proposed internal road. The comment reiterates concerns regarding driver and pedestrian safety from the proposed subdivision. See Response to SHIKANY-8 regarding potential density-related pedestrian safety issues and potential issues regarding Grayson Road sidewalk improvements. 42 Response to SHIKANY-109 The comment states that sidewalks along Grayson Road are incomplete and create significant safety issues for pedestrians walking to nearby commercial districts. The comment states that these safety issues would be exacerbated by potential increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic from the proposed project’s subdivisions. The comment further states that the Draft IS/MND does not address potential impacts to pedestrians resulting from increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic. See Response to SHIKANY-8, SHIKANY-78, and SHIKANY-79 regarding the impacts of sidewalk improvements to pedestrian safety and pedestrian travel to nearby commercial areas. Per Draft IS/MND Section 17, Transportation, the potential vehicular and pedestrian traffic increases were analyzed and found to create a minimal increase (an additional 8 AM and 8 PM trips) in traffic around the project site, and would thus result in a less than significant impact to the surrounding area’s existing traffic levels. Section 17 of the Draft IS/MND also found that the proposed project would not substantially increase road hazards from proposed geometric design features, including the creation of an intersection between the proposed road and Grayson Road. As such, potential impacts to pedestrians resulting from increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic are addressed by the Draft IS/MND. Response to SHIKANY-110 The comment establishes that complete frontage improvements are standard requirements of subdivision development. The comment states that Grayson Road desperately needs sidewalk improvements, and that the County should be trying to connect fragmented sidewalks on Grayson Road, rather than granting frontage improvement concessions to developers. The comment expresses concern regarding the future public cost of sidewalk development on Grayson Road due to the County granting waivers to developers. See Response to SHIKANY-8, SHIKANY-79, and SHIKANY-107 regarding sidewalks. Response to SHIKANY-111 The comment states that the proposed project involves a significant amount of grading, utility construction, and tree removal. As such, the comment finds that the justification that the waivers for frontage improvements to be incongruent with the amount of development work that would already occur as part of the proposed project. The comment requests an explanation as to what makes frontage improvements infeasible given the extent of proposed development work and the proposed density of development. See Response to SHIKANY-8. Response to SHIKANY-112 The comment proposes that frontage sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road could be designed to go around existing trees, removing the need for tree removal. The comment further states that a large reduction in the number of proposed lots would also make the waiver for frontage improvements feasible. See Response to SHIKANY-8, SHIKANY-79, and SHIKANY-107 43 Response to SHIKANY-113 The comment cites that the reason given for the need of a waiver to frontage improvements on Grayson Road are that the nearest sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road are over 1,000 feet from the project site, and that adjacent properties that front Grayson are not expected to develop frontage improvements in the future. As such, the comment states that the County’s acceptance of the waiver is because any potential frontage improvements to the proposed project would not be connected to other Grayson Road sidewalks in the near future. The comment asserts that if this waiver is accepted, no sidewalks on Grayson Road would ever be built, as other developments would be able to make similar justifications. This comment does not identify any environmental issues. See Response to SHIKANY-8, SHIKANY-79, and SHIKANY-107 regarding sidewalks. Response to SHIKANY-114 The comment requests that if concessions are provided to the proposed project as part of the Density Bonus Law, that the public receive something in return. The comment states that under the current condition the proposed affordable unit receives the smallest lot and the worst location, and thus is not a fair benefit to the public in comparison to the concessions given. A comparison of potential social benefits does not raise environmental concerns and CEQA does not require the Draft IS/MND to analyze or compare the values of concessions given by the State Density Bonus Law to public benefits gained by the increased affordable housing. No further action is required. Response to SHIKANY-115 The comment notes that the County is required to grant incentives and concessions consistent with the Density Bonus Law unless written findings significant impacts to public health or safety, upon which there is no feasible mitigation. The comment reiterates that waiving the Grayson Road frontage improvement would create significant impacts to public health and safety that are not analyzed by the Draft IS/MND, and that this waiver is unmitigable. As such, the comment requests for the County to deny this waiver or reduce the density of the proposed project to a level in keeping with the surrounding area. The comment is noted. See Response to SHIKANY-8, SHIKANY-78, SHIKANY-79, SHIKANY-107, and SHIKANY-109 regarding potential public health and safety issues from sidewalk and frontage improvement waivers on Grayson Road. Response to SHIKANY-116 The comment asks if there will be an addition of ADUs to the proposed project, as this would increase the trip generation and parking needs of the proposed project. The comment requests that the Draft IS/MND take any proposed ADU-related potential traffic impacts into account. No ADUs would be developed as part of the proposed project. As such, no potential impacts are anticipated and no further action is required. Response to SHIKANY-117 The comment notes that while the proposed project would not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature, it would result in increased vehicle traffic. The comment notes that current driving from 44 Mohawk Drive into Grayson Road is difficult due to existing traffic exceeding the 35 mile per hour (mph) speed limit established on Grayson Road. As such, the resulting intersection from the proposed road and Grayson Road would not provide sufficient stopping time for the speed of traffic traveling over the 35 mph speed limit. Therefore, the comment concludes that the proposed project would result in increased traffic risks to existing homes. Increase in traffic as a result of the proposed project was analyzed by the Draft IS/MND in Section 2.17, Transportation. Section 2.17 found that the proposed project would generate an additional 10 AM and 8 PM peak-hour trips, which would be well below the traffic impact significance threshold of 100 peak- hour AM and PM trips. Therefore, the proposed project was found to have less than significant traffic impacts. Cars traveling either eastbound or westbound on Grayson Road would have more than 500 feet of sight distance from the project driveway. This is more than adequate to provide for adequate stopping time on the 35 mph designated Grayson Road. Response to SHIKANY-118 The comment alleges that fire risk on the project site is greater than standard urban areas due to the significant on-site and adjacent vegetation, including trees, shrubs, and grassland. The comment also asserts that existing overhead powerlines and the surrounding vegetation pose a significant fire risk. The comment requests clarification on whether power lines on-site would be undergrounded. However, the comment alleges that such measures would not be enough due to surrounding overhead power lines furthering fire risk in the project area. See Response to SHIKANY-80 on fire hazards related to existing vegetation, aboveground power lines, and underground power line installation. Response to SHIKANY-119 The comment alleges that the project area contains vegetation atypical to standard urban areas. The comment asserts that the proposed project’s high density and large building sizes, in combination with its adjacency to wooded areas, would result in a higher fire risk than usual. This could result in easily spreadable fires in the neighborhood. See Response to SHIKANY-80 on fire hazards related to existing vegetation. Response to SHIKANY-120 The commenter states that the Draft IS/MND states that vegetation removal would reduce wildfire risk, while also requiring tree replacement on-site at a 3:1 ratio. The commenter suggests that this indicates the County is not committed to enforcing tree replacement. Please see Response to SHIKANY-34, SHIKANY-35, and SHIKANY-82. Response to SHIKANY-121 The commenter states that it is unclear if it is feasible to replace all trees on-site as required. The commenter states that, if the tree replacement is done as required, then the claim that fire risk will be reduced as a result of vegetation removal is incorrect. 45 Please see Response to SHIKANY-34, SHIKANY-35, and SHIKANY-82. Response to SHIKANY-122 The comment asserts that the proposed increased density of the project creates a fire risk that is higher than typical urban areas. As addressed in Response to SHIKANY-80, SHIKANY-119, and SHIKANY-121, the project site would be constructed in accordance with all applicable design guidelines, including such as weed abatement and brush clearing regulations, subject to review by the CCCFPD Engineering Unit. The Draft IS/MND concluded that compliance with existing regulations, as well as the proposed project design and vegetation removal would reduce impacts to below a level of significance. The comment includes a general assertion regarding development, but does not identify any specific evidence that the proposed project would exacerbate potential wildfires due to its density. Response to SHIKANY-123 The comment states that some potential environmental impacts from the proposed project remain unaddressed. These include biological impacts from permanent habitat removal and traffic impacts that the comment surmises may be potentially significant. See responses to comments listed above regarding permanent habitat removal and traffic impacts from the proposed project. Other impacts mentioned have not been identified by the comment, and thus cannot be responded to. No further response is required. Response to SHIKANY-124 The comment appeals to the public and County on the privileges of subdivisions and asserts that the proposed project developer is primarily focused on increasing density on the project site rather than providing affordable housing. The comment argues that the proposed concessions and waivers disregard the long-term loss of sensitive and protected habitats and the health and safety concerns of the community. See responses to comments listed above regarding the proposed waivers and their potential impacts on habitats and public health and safety. Comments regarding the subdivision and Density Bonus Law provision and acceptance process do not raise concerns regarding the adequacy, accuracy, or completeness of the environmental assessment for the proposed project and are therefore beyond the scope of CEQA. No further response is required. Response to SHIKANY-125 The comment compares previous development projects for the project site to the proposed project, stating that the proposed project makes no attempt to balance development with existing habitat and community values. See responses to comments listed above regarding habitat. No environmental impacts have been specifically identified by the comment. No further response is required. Response to SHIKANY-126 The comment provides concluding remarks and summarizes prior points made. No response required. 46 Response to SHIKANY-127 The comment suggests, as per prior comments and in prior comment periods, that the proposed project’s density be reduced by at least 50 percent. The comment states that this would be more appropriate for maintaining the existing habitat values on this site and protecting community values and the public interest, while simultaneously allowing for the subdivision of the project site. See responses to comments listed above regarding habitat. The comment does not raise any specific environmental issues. Therefore, no further response is required. 47 Kirsten West (WEST) Response to WEST-1 The comment provides introductory remarks. No response required. Response to WEST-2 The comment notes that protections are in place through zoning and other County protections. However, the comment requests clarification regarding why some of these protections are being waived. As detailed in Draft IS/MND Section 1.4.1, Density Bonus, the State Legislature passed the State Density Bonus Law to require cities and counties to grant a density bonus and other incentives or concessions to housing development projects in which affordable housing is provided. Consistent with State law, the proposed project’s inclusion of one moderate-income housing unit would allow for a 7 percent increase in density. Development on the project site at this density would be physically precluded by the minimum lot size, lot width, depth, retaining wall setbacks, and front and side yard setbacks for the R-15 zoning designation. As such, these standards would be waived for the proposed project in accordance with State law. It is important to note that the Density Bonus Law establishes mandatory requirements for the County and is entirely separate from CEQA. Under the Density Bonus Law, the County is precluded from applying any development standard that would prevent construction of the project unless the County can make specific public health and safety findings. Response to WEST-3 The commenter asks why code-protected trees are being removed. Project design includes the avoidance of approximately 30 percent of the on-site trees, all other trees will be removed and replaced. Mitigation Measure Biology 2 prescribes replacement of all trees removed from the on-site Valley Oak Woodla nd in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. This is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice. Response to WEST-4 The comment requests clarification on why the proposed project would receive waivers that allow for housing units to be built on smaller lots than allowed by R-15 zoning standards. See Response to WEST-2 regarding Density Bonus Law waivers. Response to WEST-5 The comment requests clarification on why the proposed project would be permitted at a higher density if waivers are needed to reach said higher density. See Response to WEST-2 regarding Density Bonus Law waivers. Response to WEST-6 The comment states that the proposed project would waive the requirement to develop a sidewalk frontage on Grayson Road, only maintaining an existing bicycle lane. The comment asks why this would be allowed. 48 See Response to SHIKANY-8, SHIKANY-77, and SHIKANY-105 regarding sidewalk improvements on Grayson Road. See Response to WEST-2 regarding Density Bonus Law waivers. Response to WEST-7 The comment notes that the proposed driveway length would cause vehicles to be parked along Grayson Road. The comment states that the proposed project ’s 14 -foot setback allowance should not include the garage, and that a minimum 20-foot driveway should be included for each proposed lot to prevent parking on Grayson Road, which could potentially cause pedestrian and cyclist safety issues. See Response to SHIKANY-8, SHIKANY-76, and SHIKANY-77, regarding cyclist and pedestrian connectivity and safety. See Response to HABERMAN-5 regarding proposed driveway sizes. Response to WEST-8 The comment is concerned with the stated active hours for noise-generating activities on the project site. The comment requests a limit of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for on-site noise-generating activities on Saturday, and a weekday limitation on noise-generating activities from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The comment notes that prior projects in the County have had these restrictions. See Response to SHIKANY-104 and HABERMAN-2 for information on noise-inducing activities. Response to WEST-9 The comment summarizes prior points and provides concluding remarks. No response is required. California Wildlife Foundation/California Oaks, 201 University Avenue, H-43 Berkeley, CA 94710, (510) 763-0282 December 20, 2023 Joseph W. Lawlor Jr, AICP Contra Cost County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA, 94553 Transmitted via e-mail: joseph.lawlor@dcd.cccounty.us Re: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision, 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523, County File #CDSD20-0953, SCH No. 2022050245 Dear Mr. Lawlor: The California Oaks program of the California Wildlife Foundation works to conserve oak ecosystems because of their critical role in sequestering carbon, maintaining healthy watersheds, providing plant and wildlife habitat, and sustaining cultural values. California Wildlife Foundation/California Oaks (CWF/CO) reviewed the October 25, 2023, letter regarding the appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve the Grayson Road 10 -Lot Subdivision submitted by the Mohawk/Iroquois Neighborhood ; the October 6, 2023, letter sent by Lisa Shikany; the October 2, 2023, Staff Report with attachments; and May 27, 2022, letter sent by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). This letter contains comments regarding deficiencies of the environmental analysis and proposed mitigation for oak impacts of this ill- conceived project. The conclusion that the proposed mitigation would result in a less than significant impact to trees does not meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the mitigation plan is not in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.4. The October 2, 2023, staff report addresses comments made in CDFW’s May 2022 letter: “As detailed in the BRA Addendum, the proposed project’s potential impacts to trees and Valley Oak Woodland have been adequately analyzed, adequate mitigation has been identified, and the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to trees.” CWF/CO disagrees with the conclusion that the analysis and mitigation is adequate. While the BRA Addendum identifies 1.18 acres of the site as Valley Oak Woodland (S3), the mitigation of this Sensitive Natural Community is insufficient. The analysis is deficient in that it does not assess canopy cover and absolute percentages in upland areas or covering the channel of Grayson Creek. Further, the Sensitive Natural Communities page of the CDFW website notes: “Natural Communities with ranks of S1-S3 are considered Sensitive Natural Communities to be addressed in the environmental review processes of CEQA and its equivalents.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) mandates 2 completion of an Environmental Impact Report if a project would threaten to eliminate a plant community. The BRA Addendum does not include the rigorous analysis of an EIR. Instead, it simply identifies approximately 1.18 acres of Valley Oak Woodland that the proposed project would remove, provides a revised mitigation measure that is acknowledged as less protective than what CDFW recommends, and argues that the proposed mitigation aligns with the county’s Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. Contra Costa County’s tree protections do not override state protections for sensitive natural communities. The beginning of CDFW’s letter clearly states that they serve as “… a Trustee Agency with responsibility under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15386 for commenting on projects that could impact fish, plant, and wildlife resources.” Should the Grayson Road Subdivision project proceed, the analysis of and mitigation for the impacts to the Valley Oak Woodland must adhere to the analysis and mitigation requirements of CEQA. The proposed 3:1 replacement formula is inadequate. As noted in CDFW’s letter: Trees should be replaced at a level that will offset: 1) the lost biomass and canopy of the removed trees, and 2) the substantial temporal loss of growth habitat structure and diversity. Trees planted need to be spaced in a manner that promotes their long-term growth habits, and that serves to replicate or enhance the state of which was disturbed. The mitigation plan also lacks sufficient performance standards. Further, the suitability of the replanting scheme does not meet the requirements of CEQA to reach the less -than-significant threshold and will result in a net loss of oak woodland. Lastly, Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 limits oak tree planting to half of the mitigation for oak impacts and requires mitigation trees planted to be maintained during a seven-year establishment period. Thus, the current plan’s exclusive reliance on tree planting is out-of- compliance with this requirement. Further, it must include either the code’s seven-year establishment period or the 10-year period recommended in CDFW’s letter. Greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts of proposed tree removals must be analyzed and mitigated . The project’s environmental analysis has no discussion of the GHG emissions of the proposed tree removals. Instead, it simply includes a table (page 139 of the October 2, 2023, staff report) that summarizes operational GHG emissions. California law requires the analysis and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions associated with proposed oak woodland or forest conversions. CEQA’s sole GHG focus is “the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.” Net present value of GHG emissions forms the foundation of the state’s greenhouse reduction objectives, as well as the California Forest Protocol preservation standards. Every ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) released into the atmosphere by oak woodland or forest conversion represents a measurable potential adverse environmental effect, which is covered by CEQA. 3 Root protection zones of native oak trees should be undisturbed . The root protection area, which is half again as large as the area from the trunk to the dripline of an oak, is critical to oak tree health. The analysis speaks about root zones but does not specify how the root zone is calculated. Care of California’s Native Oaks provides additional information. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Sincerely, Janet Cobb Angela Moskow Executive Officer, California Wildlife Foundation California Oaks Program Director jcobb@californiawildlifefoundation.org amoskow@californiaoaks.org cc: Supervisor Candace Andersen, District 2, supervisorandersen@bos.cccounty.us Michelle Battaglia, Senior Environmental Scientist, CDFW, Michelle.Battaglia@wildlife.ca.gov Supervisor Diane Burgis, District 3, supervisor_burgis@bos.cccounty.us Supervisor Ken Carlson, District 4, SupervisorCarlson@bos.cccounty.us Andrew Chambers, Environmental Scientist, CDFW, Andrew.Chambers@wildlife.ca.gov Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator, planninghearing@dcd.cccounty.us James Cameron Crowder, Deputy Attorney General, james.crowder@doj.ca.gov Supervisor John Gioia, District 1, John_Gioia@bos.cccounty.us Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District 5, district5@bos.cccounty.us Lisa Shikany, lshikany@gmail.com Brendan Wilce, Conservation Program Coordinator, California Native Plant Society, bwilce@cnps.org Tiffany Yap, DEnv/PhD, Center for Biological Diversity, tyap@biologicaldiversity.org Integral Consulting Inc. 433 Visitacion Avenue Brisbane, CA 94005 telephone: 925-895-4302 www.integral-corp.com MEMORANDUM To: Andy Byde, Calibr Ventures From: Sadie McGarvey, Integral Consulting Inc. Date: January 3, 2024 Subject: Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project – Response to California Wildlife Foundation Comment Letter This memo has been prepared to respond to comments presented in the December 20, 2023 comment letter from the California Wildlife Foundation (CWF) regarding the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California. Responses were developed using information presented within the IS/MND circulated by Contra Costa County on March 24, 2023, as well as the Biological Resource Analysis Addendum for the Grayson Road 10-Lot Subdivision Project, Contra Costa County, California (prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC, dated December 2022) (BRA Addendum), and the Response to Comments letter (RTC) provided to Joseph Lawlor of Contra Costa County on July 31, 2023. Comments Comment 1: While the BRA Addendum identifies 1.18 acres of the site as Valley Oak Woodland (S3), the mitigation of this Sensitive Natural Community is insufficient. The analysis is deficient in that it does not assess canopy cover and absolute percentages in upland areas or covering the channel of Grayson Creek. Response 1: The BRA Addendum provides an analysis of acreage of valley oak woodland to be impacted by the proposed Project (1.18 acre), as well as the number of trees within the valley oak woodland proposed for removal as a result of Project activities (32 native and 8 non-native). While the arborist report did not include an assessment of canopy cover or “absolute percentages” for the onsite trees, this is not a requirement for tree assessments and is not standard practice for determining health and vigor of trees, or calculating impacts to onsite trees. Further, it is unclear what “absolute percentages” refers to as it is not defined in either the CDFW comment letter from which it was copied, or the CWF letter. Finally, an assessment of canopy in upland areas cover the channel of Grayson Creek is not necessary as no trees that provide canopy cover over Grayson Creek Response to CWF Comments January 3, 2024 will be impacted as part of Project activities (i.e., they are outside of the development footprint). The sufficiency of the mitigation for impacts to valley oak woodland (as a Sensitive Natural Community) is further addressed in RTC Response to CDFW-3. In summary, mitigation for trees removed will occur in-kind and on-site at a 3:1 ratio for native trees, or out-of-kind at 1:1 ratio for non-native trees, to be replaced with native trees. This is consistent with the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance implementation and practice, and there is no ecological or other basis for concluding that this tree replanting is inadequate. Comment 2: Further, the Sensitive Natural Communities page of the CDFW website notes: “Natural Communities with ranks of S1-S3 are considered Sensitive Natural Communities to be addressed in the environmental review processes of CEQA and its equivalents.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) mandates completion of an Environmental Impact Report if a project would threaten to eliminate a plant community. The BRA Addendum does not include the rigorous analysis of an EIR. Instead, it simply identifies approximately 1.18 acres of Valley Oak Woodland that the proposed project would remove, provides a revised mitigation measure that is acknowledged as less protective than what CDFW recommends, and argues that the proposed mitigation aligns with the county’s Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. Response 2: Implementation of the Project would not result in elimination of existing plant communities - Mitigation Measures Biology-2 and Biology-7 require on-site replacement of trees removed and planting of Valley Oak Woodland species within all on-site undeveloped areas. This is further discussed in RTC Response to CDFW-3 and SHIKANY- 27. Comment 3: Contra Costa County’s tree protections do not override state protections for sensitive natural communities. The beginning of CDFW’s letter clearly states that they serve as “… a Trustee Agency with responsibility under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15386 for commenting on projects that could impact fish, plant, and wildlife resources.” Should the Grayson Road Subdivision project proceed, the analysis of and mitigation for the impacts to the Valley Oak Woodland must adhere to the analysis and mitigation requirements of CEQA. The proposed 3:1 replacement formula is inadequate. As noted in CDFW’s letter: Trees should be replaced at a level that will offset: 1) the lost biomass and canopy of the removed trees, and 2) the substantial temporal loss of growth habitat structure and diversity. Trees planted need to be spaced in a manner that promotes their Response to CWF Comments January 3, 2024 long-term growth habits, and that serves to replicate or enhance the state of which was disturbed. Response 3: This comment reiterates the comments in the CDFW comment letter and is addressed in RTC Response to CDFW-3. Comment 4: The mitigation plan also lacks sufficient performance standards. Response 4: While the trees planted as mitigation are presumed to experience a very high survival rate due to the proximity to managed landscapes and ability to irrigate during the initial establishment period, monitoring and performance standards can be used to supplement Mitigation Measure Biology 2 to address this comment and any others referencing performance standards related to tree removals and replacement. Proposed performance standards language is below: Annual monitoring of the mitigation trees shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during an initial establishment period. During annual monitoring, a minimum of 80% of the mitigation trees shall be alive and healthy (as demonstrated by growth and fruiting, as appropriate). If at any point during annual monitoring, survival and health drop below the minimum health requirement (80% healthy trees), an assessment of cause(s) for this health failure shall be provided by the qualified biologist, and remedial actions shall be implemented. If survival drops below 80%, trees will be replaced in- kind and at the same location, unless a different species or location is prescribed by the qualified biologist as part of remedial recommendations. Annual monitoring will occur up to 10 years, but may cease before then if the above success criteria are met during five consecutive years. Comment 5: Further, the suitability of the replanting scheme does not meet the requirements of CEQA to reach the less-than-significant threshold and will result in a net loss of oak woodland. Response 5: This comment is addressed in RTC Response to CDFW-3. Comment 6: Lastly, Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 limits oak tree planting to half of the mitigation for oak impacts and requires mitigation trees planted to be maintained during a seven-year establishment period. Thus, the current plan’s exclusive reliance on tree planting is out-of-compliance with this requirement. Further, it must include either the code’s seven-year establishment period or the 10-year period recommended in CDFW’s letter. Response to CWF Comments January 3, 2024 Response 6: The Project’s adherence to Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 is addressed in RTC Response to SHIKANY-71. Monitoring and maintenance during the mitigation trees’ establishment period are discussed above in Response 4. Dear County Building Department Members, I am speaking in support of the proposed 10-lot subdivision project in our neighborhood. My name is Spencer MacKinnon, and I have been a member of this community since 1984. The prospect of a new housing development brings about a fresh and vibrant transformation to our locality, and I believe it is a positive step forward for our community. Our neighborhood boasts homes with an average age ranging from 35 to 75 years old. While the charm of these residences is undeniable, introducing new housing will undoubtedly rejuvenate the area and provide a modern aesthetic. I am excited about the opportunity to welcome new families into our community, that I have enjoyed for nearly four decades. Over time, neighborhoods can risk being perceived as outdated, and I believe this project will play a crucial role in revitalizing our community's image. By embracing change and progress, we can ensure that our neighborhood remains a vibrant and desirable place to live. This development is an investment in the future, ensuring that our area is recognized not only for its history but also for its ongoing growth and vitality. Furthermore, I recognize the economic benefits that accompany new housing developments. The influx of new residents will bring in fresh income, supporting our regional economy. This, in turn, will have a positive impact on local businesses such as Zio Fradeo’s, Produce King, The Little Red Bistro, Sherry's Kitchen, and many others. By fostering economic growth, we contribute to the sustainability and prosperity of our beloved community. In conclusion, I wholeheartedly support the 10-lot subdivision project and believe it will create a positive impact on our neighborhood. I encourage the County Building Department to consider the long-term benefits it will bring to our community, not only in terms of aesthetics but also in terms of economic growth and vitality. I am confident that this development will contribute to the ongoing success and appeal of our neighborhood. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Spencer MacKinnon Grayson Road Subdivision Project (County File CDSD20-09531) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT JOSEPH W. LAWLOR JR, AICP, PROJECT PLANNER CONTACT: JOSEPH.LAWLOR@DCD.CCOUNTY.US, 925-655-2872 1 Today’s Presentation 2 PROJECT BACKGROUND PROJECT OVERVIEW ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPEAL OVERVIEW Background 3 Review Timeline 4 Project Overview 5 Project Site 6 1024 and 1026 Grayson Road, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523Location 3.05-gross-acre project site Grayson Creek Two Unoccupied Existing Residences Site Single-Family Residential Low Density (SL) R-15 Single-Family Residential (R-15) General Plan and Zoning 7 Grayson Road Subdivision Project 8 Subdivide the 3.05-acre project site into 10 lots Lots Range from 7,347 to 22,460 square feet 2,900 to 3,500 Sq. Ft. 4-to 5-bedroom SFR each lot Lot 1 would be restricted for sale to a moderate-income household Project is eligible for a Density Bonus, waivers or reductions in development standards, incentives and concessions, and parking reductions 9 10 Environmental Review 11 2022 IS/MND 12 April 22, 2022, IS/MND Identified Impacts in the Following: • Air Quality • Biological Resources •Cultural Resources •Geological Resources •Tribal Cultural Resources 2023 IS/MND 13 Revisions based on Comment Letter from CDFW -Updated Biological Resources Study with Updated Mitigations and Additional Survey -Updated Grading Plan to avoid habitat 14 Trees 15 -Arborist Reports from May 6, 2020, and Updated October 17, 2022 -Project Site includes 130 trees > 6” -97 trees will need to be removed -BRA Addendum -Valley Oak Woodland: 40 trees, 32 of which are native species Replace with 104 native valley oak woodland tree species (MM Biology 2) -Riparian Woodland: 18 trees Replaced with 54 native riparian woodland tree species (MM Biology 2) Trees 16 -Tree Planting Plan -67 24" BOX SIZE, -63 15 GAL SIZE -32 5 GAL SIZE ----------------------- 162 Replacement Trees 17 18 Density Bonus 19 State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code §§65915-65918) “a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density,” Base Density Project site: 3.05 gross acreage: 2.76 net acres (proposed right-of-way and private road area are deducted) General Plan SL Designation: 1.0 –2.9 units/acre Base density: (2.76 net acres) * (2.9 units/acre) = 8.004 units Percent moderate-income units: (1 unit ) / (8.004 units) = 12.49%, rounded up to 13% Density Bonus Density Bonus Calculation: (9 units, rounded up from 8.004) * (0.08) = 0.72 units, fractional unit rounded to 1 unit; 9 units + 1 unit = 10 units Total Allowable Units: 10 Units Staff Recommendation 20 21Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) staff recommend that the County Planning Commission: A. OVERTURN the County Planning Commission’s denial of County File #CDSD20-09531, and GRANT the appeal of Calibr Ventures, B. FIND that on the basis of the whole record before the County (Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553), that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project reflects the County’s independent judgment and analysis; C. ADOPT the March 24, 2023, Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) prepared for the project; D. APPROVE the Vesting Tentative Map received January 28, 2022, by the Department of Conservation and Development, Current Planning Division; E. APPROVE the attached findings and conditions of approval prepared for this project; and F. DIRECT Staff to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. Questions? 22 1024 -1026 Grayson Rd •3.05 Acres •10 New Single-Family Homes. •Sq Ft 2,498 to 3,705. •3 Plans, with 2 elevations each •Each home has a two or three car garage, minimum two car driveways •Utilizing State Density Bonus (Government Code Sections 65915 –65918) •28-foot wide new access road w/parking on one side and sidewalk •7,347 sq ft minimum lot; 22,460 sqft max lot; 13,769 sq ft avg G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 2 PLAN 3 LOT 3 PLAN 3 LOT 4 PLAN 2 LOT 5 PLAN 1LOT6 PLAN 3 LOT 7 PLAN 3 LOT 8 PLAN 3 LOT 9 PLAN 2 LOT 10 PLAN 3 1"=20'CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LAYOUT No.61148 Date: By: Scale: YEARS 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 DANVILLE,CALIFORNIA 94526 (925)837-3780 |DEBOLTCIVIL.COM 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 03/25/22 EMJobNo.: 19300 LOT 1* PLAN 1 *-Affordable unit for Moderate Income Household Architecture Plan 2 Affordable CALlBR \IE NT U AES ----- Second Floor 1,796 SF 9 <D 12'-6" :Jl509-i 3:l50SH ---------t I I I I i i I I I I I 45'-0" 14'-0" 2050SH 4050SH 2050SH 2-GA.R GARAGE � DINNNG 18'-6" 0050SH 3'.)509-i mtJ]Jm I{J CJ□Dm; �------------------- 9 p��2�F 3 __ ....,___H��...!.,1:-:6l.:..L'--:-;-11l._:;-,, ��1�.JL�6'-1L6:-,,�f�6!8='-0!"_"=_j*�=-tt1_a=._=1U':3='-1."..7="��1_J__j 45'-0" 5 Bdrm I 4.5 Bath I 2 Den I Loft I 2-Car Garage First Floor 1,786 SF 1024 & 1026 Grayson Road A3.01 PLEASANT HILL, CA WHA © 2001 WIUIAMHEZMALHALCHARCHrTECTS. INC. ct>aWHA. I 2021351 I 11-24-21 103 105 106 109 110107 111 113 123 104 124 153 125 126 128 129 127 133 132 131 151 150 152 156 158 164 165 166 147 148 149 146 145 143144 141 142 140 139 136 135 115 114 116 130 175 176 177 178 180 184 187 188 193194 195174 169 168 170 167 171 171B 108 112 131 G R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SFLOT8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF PROJECT SUMMARY DATE CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FPD CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT CITY OF PLEASANT HILL PACIFIC GAS &ELECTRIC AT&T COMCAST UTILITIES: WATER SUPPLY: FIRE PROTECTION: SEWAGE DISPOSAL: STORM DRAIN: GAS &ELECTRIC: TELEPHONE: CABLE TELEVISION: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-15EXISTINGZONING: CIVIL ENGINEER: PROPOSED LAND USE: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: TOTAL AREA: SUBDIVIDER: SURVEYOR: 3.05±AC GROSS (2.76±AC NET) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO:166-030-001 &002 PROPERTY ADDRESS: EASTON C.MCALLISTER,PE P.E.#61148 EXP 12/31/20 ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES925-683-5493 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVDDANVILLE,CA 94526 (925)837-3780 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVDDANVILLE,CA 94526 (925)837-3780 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD PLEASANT HILL,CA 94523 ENGINEER'S STATEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK ON THIS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP HAS BEENPREPAREDBYMEORUNDERMYDIRECTIONINACCORDANCEWITH STANDARD CIVIL ENGINEERING PRACTICE. 01/28/22 VICINITY MAP N.T.S. BUILDING CONCRETE EXISTING EASEMENT FENCE INVERT PRIVATE UTILITY EASEMENT REBAR RECORD DATA RIGHT OF WAY SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STORM DRAIN DRAIN INLET TOTAL WATER METER WATER VALVE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WATER VALVE FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED STANDARD STREET MONUMENT EASEMENT LINE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY LINE TIE LINE CENTERLINE EXISTING WATER LINE EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPE EXISTING ELECTRIC CABLE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING UTILITY NOTE: THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE DERIVED FROMSURFACEOBSERVATIONANDAREAPPROXIMATEONLY.ACTUAL LOCATION AND SIZE,TOGETHER WITH PRESENCE OF ANY ADDITIONAL UTILITY LINES NOT SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. FLOOD ZONE ZONE A:SPECIAL FLOOD AREA WITHOUT BASE FLOOD.ELEVATION (BFE) ZONE X:AREAS OF 0.2%CHANCE FLOOD;AREAS OF 1%ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT ORWITHDRAINAGEAREASLESSTHAN1SQUAREMILE;AND AREAS PROTECTED BY LEVEES FROM 1%CHANCE FLOOD.FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PANEL NUMBER 06013C0280G,DATED 03/21/2017. LEGEND: BLDG CONC (E)/EX ESMT FNC INV. P.U.E REBAR. () R/W SSCO SSMH SDDI (T) WM WV No.61148 REVISIONS#DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 DANVILLE,CALIFORNIA 94526 EM/mmJobNo.: 19300 VTM-1 YEARSEASTONCMcALLISTER-PE 61148 /PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE:12/31/22 (PE)03/31/23 (PLS)(925)837-3780 |DEBOLTCIVIL.COM VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 Date:01/28/22Scale:1"=40' By:VESTING TENTATIVE MAP SHEET INDEX NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP PRELIMINARY GRADING,DRIANAGE AND UTILITY PLAN HYDROLOGY AND STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN CREEK STRUCTURE SETBACK EXHIBIT TREE INVENTORY SHEET TREE INVENTORY SHEET CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LAYOUT PROPERTY OWNER:ANDY BYDE CALIBR VENTURES925-683-5493 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD CITY OF PLEASANT HILL,CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIFORNIA TOTAL UNITS:10 RESIDENTIAL *BUILDING SETBACKS MINIMUM SIDE YARD WIDTH SHALL BE 5' MINIMUM,10'AGGREGATE FOR LOTS 51 FEET OR LESS IN WIDTH;5'MINIMUM,15' AGGREGATE FOR LOTS BETWEEN 51'AND 80'WIDTH.(COUNTY ORDINANCE SECTION 82-14.004) FRONT SETBACK:14'TO LIVING AREA 20'TO GARAGE 101 102 1 154 155 157 160 159 161 162 163 137 138 117 118 119 122 120 121 179 181 182 183 185 186 189 190 191 192 172 173 198 199 197 196 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 192A 173B 142B 138B 135A 122A G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1PAD181.0 LOT 2PAD170.0 LOT 3 PAD 170.0 LOT 4PAD170.5 LOT 5PAD173.5LOT6PAD173.5LOT7PAD176.5LOT8PAD178.0 LOT 9PAD181.0 LOT 10PAD184.0 BIO 163.30 ACCESS DRIVE TYPICAL SECTION SCALE:1"=5' A - 42'MINIMUM ESMT P/L 10' TRAVEL 8' PARKING 9.5'NEIGHBOR20'WIDE FIRE LANE 10' TRAVEL ESMT 4.5' GRAYSON ROAD FRONTAGE SCALE:1"=5' B -PROJECTGRAYSON ROADP/L 21'± EP No.61148 REVISIONS#DATE 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 DANVILLE,CALIFORNIA 94526 EM/mmJobNo.: 19300 VTM-2 YEARSEASTONCMcALLISTER-PE 61148 /PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE:12/31/22 (PE)03/31/23 (PLS)(925)837-3780 |DEBOLTCIVIL.COM VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 Date:01/28/22Scale:1"=20' By: PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN *TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE: TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SITE INLETS (EXCLUDES C.3 TREATMENTPONDOUTLETSTRUCTURE. G R A Y S O N R O A D No.61148 REVISIONS#DATE YEARS VTM-3 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 DANVILLE,CALIFORNIA 94526 (925)837-3780 |DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTONCMcALLISTER-PE 61148 /PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE:12/31/22 (PE)03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA Date:01/28/22Scale:1"=40' By:EM/mmJobNo.: 19300 HYDROLOGY AND STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN C.3 FLOW-THROUGH PLANTER -1 NATIVE SOIL COMPACTED @ 85%MIN R.C. 24"x24"STORM DRAIN CATCHBASIN 12"DRAIN ROCK LAYER 4"PVC SCHEDULE 40 PERF PIPE; FACE PERFORATIONS DOWNWARD. 18"LOAMY SAND PER CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TECHNICALGUIDANCEHANDBOOKAPPENDIXB. NO LINER 3:1 MAX. RIDGE ELEV. OUT 2"MIN 6"MIN 40ml HDPE POND LINER OR APPROVED EQUAL FINISH GRADE GRATE ELEV. BASE ELEV. CLASS II PERMEABLE, CALTRANS SPEC.68-1.025 LANDSCAPE PLANTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATERPROGRAMTECHNICALGUIDANCEHANDBOOK APPENDIX B. NOTE: REFER TO CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAMTECHNICALGUIDANCEHANDBOOKCHAPTER4FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERS. C.3 TREATMENT SIZING CALCULATIONS DETENTION SIZINGCALCULATIONS G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 2 PLAN 3 LOT 3 PLAN 3 LOT 4 PLAN 2 LOT 5 PLAN 1LOT6 PLAN 3 LOT 7 PLAN 3 LOT 8 PLAN 3 LOT 9 PLAN 2 LOT 10 PLAN 3 1"=20'CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LAYOUT No.61148 Date: By: Scale: YEARS 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 DANVILLE,CALIFORNIA 94526 (925)837-3780 |DEBOLTCIVIL.COM 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA 03/25/22 EMJobNo.: 19300 LOT 1* PLAN 1 *-Affordable unit for Moderate Income Household GGFFE E D D C C B B A AG R A Y S O N R O A D BUTTNERROADLOT 2 22,460 ±SF LOT 5 14,713±SF LOT 1 7,347±SF LOT 3 15,236±SF LOT 4 14,257±SF LOT 6 11,261±SF LOT 7 11,360±SF LOT 8 13,388±SF LOT 9 13,655±SF LOT 10 14,013±SF TOE OFCREEKBANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5 :1TOEOFCREEK BANK79.20CREEKSTRUCTURESETBACK30'2.5 :1TOEOFCREEKBANK81.49REEKUREK30'RUCTTBACCSTSE2.5 :1TOEOFCREEKBANK94.03ECREEKSTRUCTURSETBACK30'2.5 :1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.41RECREEKSTRUCTUSETBACK30'2.5 :1TOEOFCREEKBANK84.80KCTURECKCREESTRUSETBA30'2.5 :1TOEOFCREEKBANK91.30TUREKCREEKSTRUCSETBAC30'2.5 :1No.61148 REVISIONS#DATE YEARS 811 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD #201 DANVILLE,CALIFORNIA 94526 (925)837-3780 |DEBOLTCIVIL.COMEASTONCMcALLISTER-PE 61148 /PLS 9583 RENEWAL DATE:12/31/22 (PE)03/31/23 (PLS) 1024 &1026 GRAYSON ROAD SUBDIVISION SD20-9531 VICINITY OF PLEASANT HILL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA Date:01/28/22Scale:1"=40' By:EM/mmJobNo.: 19300 CREEK STRUCTURE SETBACK EXHIBIT G R A Y S O N R O A D REFER TO ARBORIST REPORTFORTREE GRAYSONROAD SUBDIVISION1024-1026GRAYSONROADCONTRACOSTACOUNT,CALIFORNIARWStover&Associates,Inc.LandscapeArchitecture1620 North Main Street, Suite 4WalnutCreek, CA94596Ph:925.933.2583LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 F AA J QUERCUS LOBATA QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'EVE CASE' FESTUCA CALIFORNICA ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'MONTEREY CARPET' ARBUTUS MENZEISII EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL) REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREE SPECIES,STATUS &PROTECTION MEASURES. GRAYSON ROAD A J QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPIS PLANT MATERIALS LIST WUCOLS SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WATER USE NUMBERTREES: ARBUTUS MENZIESII MADRONE 24"BOX LOW 13 CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS (LOW-BRANCH)WESTERN REDBUD 24"BOX LOW 7 QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPIS CANYON LIVE OAK 24"BOX VERY LOW 17 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 24"BOX VERY LOW 26 QUERCUS LOBATA VALLEY OAK 24"BOX LOW 4 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 15 GA VERY LOW 13 QUERCUS LOBATA VALLEY OAK 15 GA LOW 14 AESCULUS CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE 15 GAL VERY LOW 35 ARBUTUS MENZIESII MADRONE 15 GA LOW 1 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 5 GA*VERY LOW 17 QUERCUS LOBATA VALLEY OAK 5 GA*LOW 13 ARBUTUS MENZIESII MADRONE 5 GA*LOW 2 SHRUBS: MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER GRASS 1 GA LOW 66 RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'EVE CASE'COFFEEBERRY 5 GA LOW 20 MANZANITA CARPET 1 GA@ 48"O.C.LOW 1,205 SF CALIFORNIA FESCUE 1 GA@ 30"O.C.LOW 780 SF GROUND COVERS: A ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'MONTEREY CARPET' F FESTUCA CALIFORNICA J JUNCUS PATENS GRAY RUSH 1 GA@ 30"O.C.LOW 820 SF SITE MAP L1.1TREEMITIGATION PLANMATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2 MITIGATION NOTES: •18 native trees removed within riparian area:•Replaced with 54 native trees •32 Native Trees removed in valley oak woodland area •Replaced with 104 Native trees:(67)AT 24"BOX SIZE,(63)AT 15 GAL SIZE,(32)AT 5 GAL SIZE* GGEENNEERRAALL NNOOTTEESS:: 1.All planting shall be watered by a fully automatic irrigation system.2.Welded-wire cages shall be constructed around all tree plantings to protect them from deer herbivory. *Replacement trees shall be planted as 15-gallon trees,except that up to50percentoftherequiredreplacementtreesmaybeplantedas5-gallon trees if it is determined based on an arborist report that long-term tree health and survival will be improved by starting with a smaller container size. LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6LOT 7 LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA QUERCUS LOBATA EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYPICAL) REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREE SPECIES,STATUS &PROTECTION MEASURES. QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPIS QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA G R A Y S O N R O A D LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5LOT6LOT7LOT8 LOT 9 LOT 10 AA J RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'EVECASE' MUHLENBERGIA RIGENSCERCISOCCIDENTALIS FESTUCA CALIFORNICA ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'MONTEREYCARPET' ARBUTUS MENZEISII QUERCUSAGRIFOLIA QUERCUSLOBATA EXISTINGTREES TO REMAIN(TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES,STATUS &PROTECTIONMEASURES. EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN(TYPICAL)REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR TREESPECIES,STATUS &PROTECTIONMEASURES. GRAYSONROAD AF J QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPIS QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPIS QUERCUS LOBATAQUERCUS AGRIFOLIA MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2 REFER TO SHEET L1.1 FOR PLANT MATERIALS LIST SUBDIVISION1024-1026GRAYSONROADCONTRACOSTACOUNT,CALIFORNIARWStover&Associates,Inc.LandscapeArchitecture1620NorthMain Street,Suite4WalnutCreek, CA94596Ph:925.933.2583SITE MAP L1.2TREEMITIGATION PLAN 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0617 Name: Status:Type:Discussion Item Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 Title:HEARING to consider an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s approval of a 10-lot major subdivision at 3180 Walnut Boulevard in the unincorporated Walnut Creek area and to consider approving the project, including approving a vesting tentative map, approving a density bonus, adopting a mitigated negative declaration, and related actions. (County File No. CDSD21-09581) (Andy Byde – Applicant; Calibr Ventures, Inc. – Property; William Goodwin – Appellant). (Dominique Vogelpohl, Department of Conservation and Development) Attachments:1. Attachment 1 - Walnut Blvd Findings and Conditions of Approval, 2. Attachment 2 - Appeal Letter, 3. Attachment 3 - IS_MND and MMRP, 4. Attachment 4 - CPC and ZA Staff Reports, 5. Attachment 5 - Vesting Tentative Map, Project Plans, and Materials, 6. Presentation CDSD21-09581, 7. Correspondence Received.pdf, 8. Applicant Presentation..pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass 5:0 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Walnut Blvd Subdivision Project Appeal (County File #CDSD21-09581) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.OPEN the public hearing on an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s decision to approve a 10-lot major subdivision located at 3180 Walnut Boulevard in the unincorporated Walnut Creek area of the County (County File #CDSD21-09581); RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing. 2.DENY the appeal of William Goodwin. 3.FIND that the mitigated negative declaration prepared for the project adequately analyzes the project’s environmental impacts, that there is no substantial evidence that project will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the mitigated negative declaration reflects the County’s independent judgement and analysis. 4.ADOPT the June 21, 2023 mitigated negative declaration prepared for the project 5.ADOPT the mitigation monitoring and reporting program prepared for the project. 6.APPROVE a ten percent density bonus (one additional unit), the requested concession to utilize gross CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 acreage to determine the base density for the project site, and the requested waivers or reductions in development standards related to minimum lot size, lot width, and setbacks. 7.APPROVE the vesting tentative map for the project, including the requested exceptions from offsite collect and convey diversion requirements, detention basin requirements, and underground utility requirements. 8.APPROVE a tree permit to allow removal of 43 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees. 9.APPROVE the attached findings in support of the project. 10.APPROVE the project conditions of approval. 11.DIRECT the Director of Conservation and Development to file a CEQA Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. 12.SPECIFY that the Department of Conservation and Development, located at 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA, is the custodian of the documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision of the Board of Supervisors is based. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant has paid the necessary application deposit and is obligated to pay supplemental fees to cover all additional costs associated with the application process. BACKGROUND: This hearing is an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s January 10, 2024 decision to approve a vesting tentative map for the Walnut Blvd Subdivision Project, County File #CDSD21-09581, subdividing a 2.88-acre parcel into 10 lots. The project is a density bonus subdivision and incorporates waivers and concessions to County General Plan, Zoning and Subdivision standards as provided for in the State’s density bonus law. The project also includes a tree permit to allow the removal of 43 code protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees. The project includes exceptions to County subdivision (Title 9) requirements including undergrounding of utilities, collect and convey requirements, and minimum stormwater detention basin size. The project was initially heard by the Zoning Administrator on October 2, 2023 and continued to October 16, 2023. At the October 16, 2023 hearing the ZA approved the subdivision with modifications to the conditions of approval. William Goodwin and Kim Asher appealed the ZA’s decision on October 26, 2023. The appeal was heard by the County Planning Commission on January 10, 2024. After receiving public testimony, the CPC voted unanimously (7-0) to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s approval and denied the appeal. William Goodwin appealed the CPC’s decision on January 19, 2024. Project Description CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map to subdivide a 2.88-acre parcel into 10 lots with proposed lot sizes ranging from 9,292 to 17,659 square-feet. Development will include the construction of 10 new, two-story, single-family residences as well as complete site improvements including the construction of a new private road, grading, retaining walls, stormdrain facilities, new landscaping, and frontage improvements including sidewalk, curb and gutter along the project frontage. The project also includes a tree permit to allow the removal of 43 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 additional trees. Demolition of the existing residence and detached garage and approximately 17,000 cubic yards of grading are also part of the project scope of work. The applicant has requested and qualifies for a density bonus due to its commitment to making one of the residences available for sale to a moderate-income family. The applicant has also requested a concession and reductions or waivers of development standards, as described in more detail below, as authorized under State Density Bonus Law. The applicant has also requested exceptions to County subdivision (Title 9) requirements including undergrounding of utilities, collect and convey requirements and minimum stormwater detention basin size. Applicable State Law State Density Bonus Law The State Density Bonus Law (Government Code, Sections 65915-65918) incentivizes the building of affordable housing by granting developers a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density, as well as other incentives or concessions, waivers of development standards, and parking ratio reductions in return for a commitment to provide affordable housing as part of a development project. If a developer meets the requirements of the Law, a local agency must award a density bonus. A density bonus is available to housing development projects that comply with at least one of the following criteria: ·At least 5 percent of the housing units are restricted to very low-income households. ·At least 10 percent of the housing units are restricted to lower-income households. ·At least 10 percent of the housing units in a for-sale common interest development are restricted to moderate-income households. The amount of density bonus depends upon and increases with the percentage of the development made available as affordable housing. In calculating the applicable density bonus “all density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number,” and “each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number.” In addition to the density bonus, a qualifying development is also entitled to a certain number of concessions or incentives. A concession or incentive is defined as a reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements, such as a reduction in setback or minimum square footage requirements; or approval of mixed-use zoning; or other regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. A requested concession or incentive may not be denied unless the local agency makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following: (A)The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 3 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 (B)The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households. (C)The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. The State Density Bonus Law also provides that the local agency may not apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the permitted density (including the density bonus) or with the requested concessions or incentives. That is, a developer may request, and the local agency must grant, an unlimited number of waivers or reductions of development standards if application of the standard would physically preclude construction of a qualifying development at the density and with the concessions or incentives permitted under the State Density Bonus Law. Housing Accountability Act The Housing Accountability Act (Government Code, Section 65589.5) provides additional safeguards for housing development projects. When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the housing development project’s application is determined to be complete, the local agency may disapprove the project or impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density only if the decision is based upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist: (A) The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. A “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. (B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified, other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density. For purposes of the HAA, the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision. Density Bonus Request The applicant requests a density bonus and proposes to restrict one lot (Lot 4) for affordable housing and to make it available for sale to a moderate-income household. ·Project site:2.88 gross acreage 2.4 net acres (proposed right-of-way and private road area are deducted) ·General Plan SL Land Use Designation allows 1.0 - 2.9 units per acre CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 4 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 ·Base density: (2.4 net acres) * (2.9 units per acre) = 6.96 units ·Percent of units made available for sale to moderate-income households: (1 unit ) / (6.96 units) = 14.36%, rounded up to 15% By making 15% of base units available for sale to moderate-income households, the project qualifies for a 10% density bonus and is entitled to one concession or incentive. As a concession, the applicant requests that the County utilize gross acreage, rather than net acreage, in calculating the project’s base density. ·Revised dase density (with concession): (2.88 acres) * (2.9 units per acre) = 8.35 units, fractional unit rounded up to 9 base units ·Density Bonus Calculation: (9 units) * (0.10) = 0.9 units, fractional unit rounded to 1 unit; 9 units + 1 unit = 10 units The applicant has also requested waivers or reductions from R-20 development standards that will allow for reduced lot size,average lot width and yard setbacks.These waivers and reductions of development standards are necessary to allow for development of the project at the permitted density and with the requested concession. Site Description The project site is located in unincorporated Walnut Creek area, surrounded by the City of Walnut Creek, with the City of Lafayette to the west, the cities of Pleasant Hill and Concord to the north, unincorporated County to the south and Mount Diablo State Park to the east. The project site is located at 3180 Walnut Boulevard at the corner of public road Walnut Boulevard and private road View Lane. The approximately 2.88-acre project site corresponds to Accessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 180-240-002. The project site is located within a residential area and is surrounded by single-family homes. Walnut Heights Elementary School is located approximately 800 feet to the northeast. Interstate 680 (I-680) is located approximately 0.89 miles southwest of the site. The project site contains an existing vacant single-family residence with a detached garage, which would be demolished prior to project construction. The site was historically cultivated with an orchard since at least 1946. Orchard remnants, including mature and aging pecan, almond, and walnut trees, are distributed across the site. The site also contains native oaks, with the highest density of native oaks found along the south property line. A drainage swale parallels the entire north property line, terminating in a drainage inlet at the northwest corner of the site. The project site slopes down generally from northeast to southwest, ranging in elevation from approximately 232 feet above sea level (ASL) to approximately 192 feet ASL. General Plan Land Use Designation The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Single-Family Residential-low Density (SL). The primary land uses permitted in this designation include detached single-family homes and accessory buildings and structures. As the project will result in single-family residential development, the project is consistent with the allowed uses of this general plan designation. The SL designation allows 1.0 - 2.9 units per net acre. This would ordinarily result in a maximum of 7 units on the site. However, as described above, the applicant has requested a density bonus concession to utilize gross acreage in the base density calculation. Combined with the density bonus required under the State Density Bonus Law, this results in a maximum development CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 5 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 capacity of 10 units on the site. Therefore, a 10-lot subdivision is consistent with the allowed density for the SL General Plan designation. Zoning The Zoning District for the project site is Single-Family Residential (R-20). The project, as proposed, would not be consistent with the R-20 development standards with respect to minimum lot size, lot width, or setbacks. However, the applicant has requested waivers or reductions of these development standards as allowed under the State Density Bonus law. The applicant has requested waivers or reductions of development standards pertaining to: ·a reduction in minimum lot size for Lots 1-10; ·a reduction in the minimum average lot width for Lots 1-5 and 7-10; ·a reduction in minimum front yard and side yard setbacks for development of the residences on Lots 1-10; and ·0-ft accessory structure setbacks for the development of retaining walls on Lots 1-10. The proposed lot sizes, average lot width, depth, and setbacks, are shown in the following table. The applicant is seeking these reductions and waivers because application of the R-20 development standards would physically preclude the development of the project at the permitted density and with the requested concession. With the requested waivers and reductions, the project would be considered consistent with the R-20 single- family residential zoning district. Lot #Lot Area (20,000 square feet minimum) Footprint Area in square feet Depth (120 feet minimum) Average Width (120 feet minimum) Front yard Setback (25 feet minimum) Side Yard Setback (15 feet, 35 feet aggregate, minimum) Retaining Walls (structure setbacks in feet) Lot 1 9,645 2,483 145.3 66.4 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 2 10,889 2,533 168.6 64.6 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 3 11,731 2,913 174.1 67.4 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 4*10,764 2,533 150.6 71.5 1 foot to shunt turn around; 20 feet from street 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 5 13,270 2,533 132 100.5 20 feet to face of garage; 10 feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 6 17,659 2,483 127.2 138.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 7 9,292 2,533 130.9 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 8 9,555 2,913 134.5 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 9 9,819 2,442 138.2 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 10 15,797 2,533 141.3 111.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Notes: * Designated as affordable unit CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 6 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 Lot #Lot Area(20,000square feetminimum)FootprintArea insquare feet Depth (120feetminimum)AverageWidth (120feetminimum)Front yardSetback(25 feetminimum)Side YardSetback (15feet, 35 feetaggregate,minimum)RetainingWalls(structuresetbacks infeet)Lot 1 9,645 2,483 145.3 66.4 20 15 feetaggregate,(no yardless than 5feet)0Lot 2 10,889 2,533 168.6 64.6 20 15 feetaggregate,(no yardless than 5feet)0Lot 3 11,731 2,913 174.1 67.4 20 15 feetaggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 4*10,764 2,533 150.6 71.5 1 foot to shunt turn around; 20 feet from street 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 5 13,270 2,533 132 100.5 20 feet to face of garage; 10 feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 6 17,659 2,483 127.2 138.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 7 9,292 2,533 130.9 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 8 9,555 2,913 134.5 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 9 9,819 2,442 138.2 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 10 15,797 2,533 141.3 111.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Notes: * Designated as affordable unit County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance The County Tree Ordinance provides for the protection of certain trees by regulating tree removal while allowing for reasonable development of private property. The project Arborist Report, prepared by certified arborist Jennifer Tso (#WE-10270A) and dated January 10, 2023, provides an inventory and evaluation of all trees on and adjoining the project site that may be impacted by the proposed project. A total of 73 trees were surveyed, numbered, tagged, identified, measured, and evaluated. A total of 43 code-protected trees would be removed, and work would occur within the dripline of 17 additional code-protected trees. There were 16 tree CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 7 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 species inventoried, but only 3 species are listed in the County Tree Ordinance under the indigenous species list: 26 Valley Oaks, 13 California Black Walnut trees, and 2 Coast Redwoods. The other tree species include: 7 Almond trees, 5 Holly Oaks, 4 English Walnut trees, 2 Monterey Pines, 4 Privets, 1 Elm, 1 English Hawthorn, 1 Olive tree, 1 Pepper tree, and 7 various fruit trees. Tree removal and work under the dripline is due to development of the proposed project. The arborist report indicates these trees cannot be avoided and are not expected to survive, thus, requiring removal. Four trees to be removed are due to poor health condition (a California Black Walnut, 2 Almond trees, and a Plum tree). In addition, remaining trees that are proposed for preservation on and adjacent to the project site would be preserved through the implementation of the tree mitigation measures described in the arborist report. These mitigation measures will be required to be in place throughout the entire construction period. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance The project is subject to County’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 822-4). Pursuant to the Ordinance, a residential development of five or more for-sale units shall require at least 15 percent of the for- sale units to be developed and sold as affordable units. At least twenty percent of the inclusionary units shall be sold at an affordable price to lower-income households. The remaining inclusionary units shall be sold to moderate-income families at an affordable price. Under the Ordinance, the projects is required to provide 1.35 inclusionary units (9 total base units x 0.15 = 1.35 units). The applicant submitted a revised project proposal, dated March 22, 2022, that included an Inclusionary Housing Plan and the density bonus request that proposed to construct one for-sale moderate- income inclusionary unit (affordable to households with an income up to 120% of Area Median Income) on Lot 4 of the property. The unit on Lot 4 will be an approximately 2,533-square-foot single-family detached home consisting of four bedrooms. The one moderate-income unit is proposed to satisfy the project’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements as well as qualify the project for the requested density bonus. The applicant must comply with both the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and State Density Bonus law with respect to development of the one moderate-income unit, and the most restrictive requirements would apply. The Applicant has proposed to pay a partial in-lieu fee for the fractional 0.35 inclusionary unit. The current calculation of the partial in-lieu fee for the fractional inclusionary unit is $15,444.00. The final calculation of the in-lieu fee will be calculated upon payment. This in-lieu fee is non- refundable and non-transferable. Traffic and Circulation The site is accessed by Walnut Boulevard, a County maintained road. The segment of Walnut Boulevard that fronts the property is approximately 32-feet of pavement within a 50-foot right of way. The ultimate road is intended as 44 feet of pavement within a 64-foot right-of-way. The applicant will be required to dedicate an additional 7 feet of right of way and install curb, a 5-foot sidewalk pavement widening and appurtenant frontage improvements along the project frontage of Walnut Boulevard. The face of curb shall be located 10 feet from the widened right of way line. There is an existing power pole located at the southwest corner of the property that will conflict with the required frontage improvements. Section 96-10.002 of the County Ordinance Code requires subdividers to underground utility distribution facilities along the project frontage. The applicant proposes to maintain the pole in its existing place and taper the width of the road as it approaches the pole. The existing utility poles supporting the overhead lines along the frontage of the project contain electric service from PG&E and various utility services including AT&T, Comcast, and Wave Cable. The existing poles have services CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 8 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 branching to an unknown number of homes on Walnut Boulevard and View Lane. In addition, the overhead lines connect to the poles at an unusual angle. Undergrounding of the lines would result in new guy wires extending into the front yard of neighboring properties which would significantly impact neighboring properties. Leaving the existing overhead utility lines in place will not be detrimental to the public welfare. All services will remain in place as is with minimal disruptions to neighboring properties. The guy wire supports will not encroach into neighboring yards as is the case with undergrounding. Given the existing site conditions, staff recommends approval to granting an exception to allow the existing facilities to remain overhead, but the existing pole within the ultimate travel way will need to be relocated behind the sidewalk. In the event the western adjacent property redevelops, or the sidewalk is extended as a safe route to the nearby school, the curb alignment and travel way should not be encumbered by a utility pole. The on-site private road is proposed to be 28 feet wide with a 5-foot sidewalk along one side for a total width of 33 feet. A minimum 35-foot private access and utility easement should be required to include the back of curb and buffer to back of walk for maintenance access. Additional easement width may be necessary to accommodate utility vaults and appurtenances. Drainage Division 914 of the County Ordinance Code requires that all storm water entering and/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 water to an adequate natural watercourse. The applicant is proposing joint use of the bioretention basin for detention purposes. The applicant has provided a preliminary hydrologic analysis of the detention basin, which determined that the basin will mitigate peak flows from the site to below pre-project levels. Joint use of the basin is allowed, provided the stormwater treatment function of the basin is not used in the storage volume modeling for the detention function. Section 914-2.004 of the County Ordinance Code provides the requirements for offsite collection and conveyance of storm water entering and/or originating on this property. The preliminary Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) proposes to divert runoff that naturally flows to an inlet at the north end of the property to the basin that goes into the south end inlet. Due to the basin’s mitigation of peak flow levels, and the final SWCP being subject to a more thorough review that verifies the existing storm drainage system is adequate, staff recommends approval to granting an exception to allow diverting this stormwater runoff. Section 914-12.002 of the County Ordinance Code sets the minimum storage volume for detention basins at 15 acre-feet, allowing for use of smaller systems with the approval of Public Works, and establishment of a public maintenance entity. Due to the size of the site (2.88 acres) and the steep existing ground topography, a basin of fifteen acre-feet is impossible to achieve without exporting an excessive volume of soil. In addition, the minimal drainage area of the site produces low stormwater runoff flow rates which do not necessitate the large configuration of the basin described in the code. By directing stormwater runoff into the basin, the proposed development will reduce the overall flow rates leaving the site and avoid impacts downstream. The basin will be privately maintained in accordance with standard maintenance procedures for bioretention and detention basins. Due to the small size of the project site and the lack of public entity to maintain such a facility, staff recommends approval to granting an exception to allow the responsible individual(s) to maintain it along with their obligation to maintain the stormwater management aspects of the basin as discussed below. A preliminary Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis was submitted in support of the runoff mitigation claims of CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 9 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 the basin design but will be subject to a more thorough review as the project progresses through final design. Stormwater Management and Discharge Control A Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP)is required for applications that will create and/or redevelop impervious surface area exceeding 5,000 square-feet in compliance with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance and the County’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)Permit.This project proposes to create and/or redevelop approximately 43,558 square-feet of impervious surface with the proposed driveways and single-family residential development,which is above the threshold for requiring submittal of a SWCP.A SWCP Exhibit and Report were submitted for Public Works review and are considered adequate for this phase of the project. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) In accordance with the provisions of CEQA,staff prepared an Initial Study (IS)assessment of potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that could result from the proposed 10-lot subdivision.The Initial Study determined that although the proposed project could have some environmental impacts,these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level through mitigation.The initial study was posted and circulated for public review and comment on June 21,2023,with the public comment period ending on July 21,2023.During the comment period fourteen letters were received addressing the adequacy of the initial study.A copy of the Initial Study,comment letters,and staff response to the comment letters are attached to this report. County Planning Commission An appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve the project was heard by the County Planning Commission on January 10, 2024. After receiving public testimony, the CPC voted unanimously (7-0) to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s approval and denied the appeal. Appeal On January 19, 2024, William Goodwin filed an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s decision to approve the subdivision. A summary of the appeal points and staff responses are provided below. A copy of the appeal letter is attached to this report. Appeal Point #1: The subject property does not currently drain into the existing offsite stormwater system. The existing storm drainage facility has not been proven to be adequate to take on the runoff that will be created by this project. Staff Response #1: The project Storm Water Control Plan has been reviewed by the Public Works Department. According to PWD the project drainage basin will discharge into the north side of Walnut Boulevard, and the storm drain inlet on the south side of the street extends across to the project site and beyond, conveying storm water runoff from 7.7 acres between Walnut Boulevard and Nob Hill Drive, in addition to half of the subdivision site. The intent of the design is to catch and detain the runoff from the subdivision such that the resultant total runoff leaving the site is reduced to a level that the downstream drainage facilities can accommodate the runoff to the prescribed “design storm” flow rate; in this case, the “ten year” event. The subdivision is required to comply with the drainage requirements of Division 914 - Drainage, of the County Code and the final map cannot be recorded until compliance with this section of the code has been demonstrated. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 10 of 11 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0617,Version:1 Appeal Point #2: The proposed bioretention basin is insufficient and will cause flooding of the neighboring properties. Staff Response #2: Public Works has reviewed the project preliminary Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) and Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis and found its conclusions sufficient. The project stormwater control plan can comply with the design standards set forth in Division 914-Drainage of Title 9 of the County Code. A final SWCP and a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance Plan will be reviewed and approved by Public Works prior to issuance of building permits and will be reviewed for compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. Appeal Point #3: The area along the north and west property lines of the project site is an “ancient creek bed” and not a “drainage swale” as described in the mitigated negative declaration. Staff Response #3: This watercourse is un-delineated on the USGS quad map and is a tributary of Indian Creek. Indian Creek itself lies on the other side of the ridge above the property in the Shell Ridge Open Space between Walnut Heights and Indian Valley Elementary school. It is the water source for the lake in the Lakewood neighborhood. Any ancient creek downstream of the lake has long been relocated, channelized, and ultimately redirected as a large, open, roadside ditch along the east side of Walnut Boulevard north of LaTour Lane. Conclusion and Staff Recommendation Staff has determined that the proposed 10-lot subdivision is consistent with the provisions of State law including CEQA and State housing and density bonus law and that the project is consistent with the County General Plan and conforms to applicable County zoning and subdivision regulations. Staff recommends that the Board deny the appeal and approve the project. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board were to deny the project, the subdivision would not be developed and the 10 new housing units, including one affordable unit would not be added to the County housing inventory. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 11 of 11 powered by Legistar™ FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09581: ANDY BYDE, CALIBR VENTURES (APPLICANT) and CALIBR VENTURES INC (OWNER) I. Findings A. General Plan Growth Management Element Standards 1. Traffic: Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Program (GMP) of the Contra Costa County General Plan requires a traffic impact analysis of any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak hour trips. The project consisting of the future construction of 10 single-family dwelling units would anticipate to generate an additional seven AM and ten PM new peak period trips, and therefore, is not required to have a project-specific traffic impact analysis. Since the project would yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, the project would not conflict with the circulation system in the area. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right of way such as streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system. The subdivision project includes a 28-foot-wide private street and a 5-foot sidewalk to connect to new frontage and sidewalk improvements on Walnut Boulevard for pedestrians and persons with disabilities within the project. Therefore, the project will be consistent with the Complete Streets policy. 2. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water quantity and quality can be provided. The project site currently receives water service from the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and is able to extend services to the project site and provide water to the 10 future residential properties. In a letter dated July 6, 2023, EBMUD stated water main extension will be required, and each lot to be provided domestic service and its own service connection and meter will require EBMUD review and approval prior to water service, which will include all applicable water efficiency measures under Section 31 of EBMUD’s Water Regulations. Therefore, the project is not expected to result in a significant increase in demand for water service for the project site or surrounding area. Page 2 of 44 3. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate sanitary sewer quantity and quality can be provided. The project site currently receives sanitary sewer service from the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. In an email dated July 7, 2021, the Sanitary District stated the project site is within their service area and sanitary sewer service is available to the project site, and would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity demand on the wastewater system, nor interfere with existing, public facilities. The developer will need to construct an 8-inch diameter onsite public main sewer and private laterals. The Sanitary District’s review and approval of all sewer improvements is required prior to construction. Therefore, the project is not expected to significantly increase the need for sanitary sewer service for the project site or surrounding area. 4. Fire Protection: The GMP requires that a fire station be within 1 ½ miles of development in urban, suburban and central business district area, or requires that automatic fire sprinkler systems be installed to satisfy this standard. The project site is located within the service area of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). Fire protection to the project site would be provided by Station No. 1 located at 1330 Civic Drive in Walnut Creek (approximately 1 ½ miles of driving distance to the site). Using an average travel speed of 35 miles per hour, an engine responding from Station No. 1 would take approximately 5 minutes to reach the project site, which meets the 5-minute response standard set by the County General Plan. Also, according to the CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer, the project site is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and is not classified as a very high fire hazards severity zone, and is not within the State Responsibility Area (SRA). The nearest fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ) within an SRA is 1.8-miles southeast of the project site and is classified as a moderate FHSZ. The nearest VHFHSZ is approximately 3.96 miles southeast of the project site. In addition, as detailed in the comment letter for the project from the Fire District dated July 22, 2023, the project is required to comply with the applicable provisions of the California Fire Code, the California Building Code, and applicable Contra Costa County Ordinances that pertain to emergency access, fire suppression systems, and fire detection/warning systems, and automatic fire sprinklers will be required. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the construction drawings would be reviewed and approved by the fire district. Therefore, the project is not expected to significantly increase the need for fire service to the project site or surrounding area. Page 3 of 44 5. Public Protection: The GMP indicates a Sheriff facility standard of 155 square-feet of Sheriff station space per 1,000 persons of population. The project would increase the population of unincorporated Contra Costa County by approximately 28 persons, which is less than the facility standard and is a non-substantial increase. Therefore, the addition of 10 residential properties to the project area would not significantly affect the provision of police services to the area. Furthermore, the project is conditioned so that the subdivision would be required to establish a Police Services District to Augment Police Services. 6. Parks and Recreation: The GMP requires three-acres of neighborhood park per 1,000 in population. The project would increase the population by approximately 28 persons. The project does not adversely impact the County’s ability to maintain the standard of having 3-acres of neighborhood parks for every 1,000 members of the population. Furthermore, the project is conditioned that the applicant pays a Park Impact and Park Dedication fee for each residence constructed. 7. Flood Control and Drainage: The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Division 914 of the County Ordinance Code requires that all storm water entering and/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 water to an adequate natural watercourse. The project is to joint use the bioretention basin for detention purposes. A preliminary hydrologic analysis of the detention basin determined that the basin will mitigate peak flows from the site to below pre-project levels. Joint use of the basin is allowed, provided the stormwater treatment function of the basin is not used in the storage volume modeling for the detention function. Section 914-12.002 of the County Ordinance Code sets the minimum storage volume for detention basins at 15 acre-feet, allowing for use of smaller systems with the approval of Public Works, and establishment of a public maintenance entity. An Page 4 of 44 exception request from this requirement per Chapter 92-6 of said Code to allow a smaller basin to be maintained by a private maintenance agreement. Findings for this exception request are under section E. Due to the small size of the project site and the lack of public entity to maintain such a facility, Public Works is not averse to the granting of this exception and allowing the responsible individual(s) to maintain it along with their obligation to maintain the stormwater management aspects of the basin as discussed in the preliminary Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis. This report was submitted in support of the runoff mitigation claims of the basin design, but will be subject to a more thorough review as the project progresses through final design. Lastly, a Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) is required for applications that will create and/or redevelop impervious surface area exceeding 10,000 square-feet in compliance with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) and the County’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. This project will create and/or redevelop approximately 43,558 square-feet of impervious surface with driveways and single-family residential development, which is above the threshold for requiring submittal of a SWCP. A SWCP Exhibit and Report were submitted for Public Works review and are considered adequate for this phase of the project. B. Tentative Map Findings 1. The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general plan required by law. Project Finding: The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Single- Family Residential-low Density (SL). The project is to subdivide 2.88 acres into 10 residential lots and have a new private road off Walnut Boulevard provide access to all 10 lots. The primary land uses permitted in this designation include detached single-family homes and accessory buildings and structures. As the project will result in single-family residential properties, the project is consistent with the allowed uses of this general plan designation. Page 5 of 44 The General Plan also determines the allowed density for an area. The General Plan land use designation of Single-Family Residential-Low Density (SL) allows 1.0 – 2.9 units per net acre. However, as the project is eligible for density bonus (Gov. Code § 65915) it is allotted one concession to a development standard, and the applicant requests a concession to the development standard “net acreage” in calculating density, and to instead use gross acreage. Using gross acreage (2.88 acres) * (2.9 dwelling unit(du)/acre) = 8.35 du, fractional unit rounded to nine base units. When calculating density using density bonus with nine base units: (9 du) * (0.10 density bonus) = 0.9 du, fractional unit rounded to 1 du; 9 du + 1du = 10 units. Therefore, a 10-lot subdivision is consistent with the allowed density for the SL General Plan designation with the approval of a concession to use gross acreage to calculate density.1 Also, the following goals and policies within the County 2005-2020 General Plan are applicable to the project: - Transportation and Circulation Element - The project is consistent with the following General Plan Transportation and Circulation Element goal and policies. Goal 5-J: To reduce single-occupant auto commuting and encourage walking and bicycling. Policy 5-16: Curbs and sidewalks shall be provided in appropriate areas. Policy 5-17: Emergency response vehicles shall be accommodated in development project design. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right of way such as streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system. The subdivision project includes a private street and a 5-foot sidewalk on one side of its curb to provide access for pedestrians to Walnut Boulevard, which will also receive new frontage improvements and 5-foot sidewalks. Therefore, the overall 1 Government Code section 65915, subdivisions (f)(5) states, “All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number.” Additionally, subdivision (q) states that “Each component of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional units shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number.” surrounding circulation system will be consistent with the Complete Streets policy. The project has also been reviewed by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District to verify the project is designed to accommodate proper access for emergency response vehicles. In a letter dated July 22, 2021, the Fire District found the project to meet such access standards. - Housing Element - The project is consistent with the following General Plan Housing Element goals and policy. Goal 1: Maintain and improve the quality of the existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods in Contra Costa County. As the project increases the housing stock in a residential neighborhood, it is consistent with this goal of the General Plan. 2. The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. Project Finding: The project will comply with the collect and convey regulations, storm drainage facilities, and design standards for private roads, except as otherwise provided for in the exemption requests made by the applicant. The applicant has requested exemptions related to offsite collect and convey diversion requirements, detention basin requirements, and underground utility requirements. The approval of each of these requested exemptions is supported by findings contained in Section D, below. Additionally, compliance with the California Building Code and all applicable County Ordinances is required for grading of the property and construction of residential buildings. C. Tree Permit Findings The Zoning Administrator is satisfied that the following factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree permit have been satisfied: 1. County Code Section 816-6.8010(2)(A): The arborist report indicated that four code-protected trees: one California Black Walnut, 2 Almond trees, and one Plum tree, were in poor health and could not be saved. 2. County Code Section 816-6.8010(2)(G): New single-family residential development requires removal of 39 code-protected trees and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees, and could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot. The project Arborist Report prepared by certified arborist Jennifer Tso (#WE- 10270A) and dated January 10, 2023, provides an inventory and evaluation of all trees on and adjoining the project site that may be impacted by the proposed project. A total of 73 trees were surveyed, numbered, tagged, identified, measured, and evaluated. 39 code-protected trees would be development related removal, and work would occur within the dripline of 17 additional code- protected trees. There were 16 tree species inventoried, but only 3 species are listed in the County Tree Ordinance under the indigenous species list: 26 Valley Oaks, 12 California Black Walnut trees, and 2 Coast Redwoods. The other tree species include: 5 Almond trees, 5 Holly Oaks, 4 English Walnut trees, 2 Monterey Pines, 4 Privets, 1 Elm, 1 English Hawthorn, 1 Olive tree, 1 Pepper tree, and 6 various fruit trees. The arborist report indicates these trees cannot be avoided and are not expected to survive, thus requiring removal. In addition, remaining trees that are proposed for preservation on and adjacent to the project site would be preserved through the implementation of the tree mitigation measures described in the arborist report. These mitigation measures will be required to be in place throughout the entire construction period. D. County Code Section 96-10.002 (Underground Utilities - Exceptions) Exception Findings There is an existing power pole located at the southwest corner of the property that will conflict with the required frontage improvements. Section 96-10.002 of the County Ordinance Code requires subdividers to underground utility distribution facilities along the project frontage. Approval of an exception request to this code section would allow the pole to remain in its existing place and taper the width of the road as it approaches the pole. 1. That there are unusual circumstances or conditions affecting the property. Project Finding: The existing utility poles supporting the overhead lines along the frontage of the project contain electric service from PG&E and various utility services including AT&T, Comcast, and Wave Cable. The existing poles have services branching to an unknown number of homes on Walnut Boulevard and View Lane. In addition, the overhead lines connect to the poles at an unusual angle. Undergrounding of the lines would result in new guy wires extending into the front yard of neighboring properties which would significantly impact neighboring properties. 2. That the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial right of the applicant. Project Finding: As discussed above, the alignment and angles of the overhead lines connecting to the utility poles present challenges for undergrounding. Additional guy wires and supports will be added encroaching into the neighboring properties that are not a part of this project. 3. That the granting of the exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which the property is situated. Project Finding: Leaving the existing overhead utility lines in place will not be detrimental to public welfare. All services will remain in place as is with minimal disruptions to neighboring properties. The guy wire supports will not encroach into neighboring yards as is the case with undergrounding. In addition, undergrounding the lines crossing Walnut Boulevard will cause a traffic burden on the community during construction. Given the existing site conditions, Public Works will not be averse to the granting of this exception to allow the existing facilities to remain overhead, but the existing pole within the ultimate travel way will need to be relocated behind the sidewalk. In the event the western adjacent property is redeveloped, or the sidewalk is extended as a safe route to the nearby school, the curb alignment and travel way should not be encumbered by a utility pole. E. County Code Sections 914-2.004(a) (Offsite Collect and Convey Requirements) and 914-12.002 (Detention Basins – Where Permitted) Exception Findings Section 914-2.004(a) requires runoff to be collected and conveyed without diversion. Section 914-12.002 sets the minimum storage volume for detention basins at 15 acre-feet, allowing for use of smaller systems with the approval of Public Works, Page 8 of 44 Page 9 of 44 and establishment of a public maintenance entity. Approval of an exception request to these code sections would allow a smaller basin to be maintained by a private maintenance agreement, and water to be diverted from naturally flowing to an inlet at the north end of the property. 1. That there are unusual circumstances or conditions affecting the property. Project Finding: Due to the size of the project site (2.88 acres) and the steep existing ground topography, a basin of fifteen acre-feet is impossible to achieve without exporting excessive volume of soil. In addition, the minimal drainage area of the site produces low stormwater runoff flow rates which do not necessitate the large configuration of the basin described in the code, and can take the runoff being diverted from the north end of the property. 2. That the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial right of the applicant. Project Finding: As discussed above, the site in question cannot accommodate a fifteen-acre-foot basin whiles supporting any kind of development due to the existing topography. Requiring a fifteen-acre-foot basin would be inconsistent with both the State Density Bonus Law and Housing Accountability Act because the requirement would preclude the project at its requested density. 3. That the granting of the exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which the property is situated. Project Finding: The purpose of the detention basin is to mitigate additional flows generated by development of the site. By directing stormwater runoff into the basin, the development is reducing the overall flow rates leaving the site alleviating impacts downstream. The basin will be privately maintained in accordance with standard maintenance procedures for bioretention and detention basins. Due to the small size of the project site and the lack of public entity to maintain such a facility, Public Works is not averse to the granting of the exceptions and allowing the responsible individual(s) to maintain it along with their obligation to maintain the stormwater management aspects of the basin, which includes the diverted stormwater runoff. F. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings A CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared for this project. It was determined that without mitigation the project may result in Page 10 of 44 significant impacts in the environmental areas of Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Tribal and Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, and Noise. Therefore, pursuant to California Code of Regulations Section 15070, the IS/MND identified mitigation measures to be incorporated into the project that will reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. The IS/MND was posted for public review on June 21, 2023. The public comment period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental document extended to July 21, 2023, during which thirteen public comment letters were received. Pursuant to Section 21080.3.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC), correspondence detailing the project was provided to the Native American Tribes, the Wilton Rancheria on September 21, 2021, and the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation on January 7, 2023. The correspondence formally notified the Tribes of their opportunity to request consultation with the County regarding the potential for the project impacting tribal cultural resources, as defined in Section 21074 of PRC. Both Tribes did not request consultation, but did request to be notified if any findings were unearthed with the development of this project. II. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09581 DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION (CDD), CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09581 Project Approval 1. County file #CDSD21-09581 and its Vesting Tentative Map for Subdivision 3180 Walnut Boulevard, is APPROVED, by the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) as generally shown and based on the following documents submitted to CDD on January 10, 2024: • Vesting Tentative Map for Subdivision 3180 Walnut Boulevard, prepared by DK Engineering; • Storm Water Control Plan, prepared by DK Engineering; • Preliminary Grading and Utility Plans, prepared by DK Engineering; • Architectural Plans, prepared by William Hezmalhalch Architects; • Site Setbacks Plan, prepared by DK Engineering; • House Height Exhibit, prepared by DK Engineering; and • Preliminary Landscape Plan, prepared by Ripley Design. And the following reports and/or studies: • Arborist Report, prepared by certified arborist Jennifer Tso (#WE-10270A) Page 11 of 44 and of Traverso Tree Service, dated Jan 10, 2023; • Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report, prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions, dated December 1, 2022; • Biological Resource Analysis (BRA) Report, dated in July 2021, and subsequent BRA Report, dated May 2022, prepared by Olberding Environmental, Inc; • Archaeological Survey Report, prepared by Garcia and Associates (GANDA), dated March 18, 2020; • Historic Resource Assessment (HRA), prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions, dated December 16, 2022; • Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration, prepared by ENGEO, dated March 12, 2020; and • Noise Impact Analysis, prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions, dated September 28, 2022. 2. This Subdivision permit includes approval of a Concession to allow the use of gross acreage and not net acreage to calculate density pursuant to Government Code 65915(d) that results in 10 residential lots. 3. This Subdivision permit includes approval of waivers or reductions in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(e)(1). The R-20 single-family zoning district development standards are applicable to the project, except as otherwise provided in the table below: Lot # Lot Area (20,000 square feet minimum) Footprint Area in square feet Depth (120 feet minimum) Average Width (120 feet minimum) Front yard Setback (25 feet minimum) Side Yard Setback (15 feet, 35 feet aggregate, minimum) Retaining Walls (structure setbacks in feet) Lot 1 9,645 2,483 145.3 66.4 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 2 10,889 2,533 168.6 64.6 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 3 11,731 2,913 174.1 67.4 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 4* 10,764 2,533 150.6 71.5 1 foot to shunt turn around; 20 feet from street 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Page 12 of 44 Lot # Lot Area (20,000 square feet minimum) Footprint Area in square feet Depth (120 feet minimum) Average Width (120 feet minimum) Front yard Setback (25 feet minimum) Side Yard Setback (15 feet, 35 feet aggregate, minimum) Retaining Walls (structure setbacks in feet) Lot 5 13,270 2,533 132 100.5 20 feet to face of garage; 10 feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 6 17,659 2,483 127.2 138.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 7 9,292 2,533 130.9 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 8 9,555 2,913 134.5 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 9 9,819 2,442 138.2 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 10 15,797 2,533 141.3 111.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Notes: * Designated as affordable unit ** Double frontage: 15 feet (20 feet minimum) 4. This Subdivision permit includes approval of a Tree Permit to allow removal of 43 code-protected trees, and work within the dripline of 17 code-protected trees: Tree # Tree Species (trunk diameter in inches) Action Reason 301 Almond (12”) Work w/in dripline Development 302 Valley Oak (17”) Work w/in dripline Development 303 Monterey Pine (36”) Work w/in dripline Development 306 Holly Oak (7”) Work w/in dripline Development 309 California Black Walnut (14”) Work w/in dripline Development Page 13 of 44 310 Valley Oak (30”) Work w/in dripline Development 314 Valley Oak (14”) Work w/in dripline Development 315 English Walnut (46”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 316 California Black Walnut (23”) Work w/in dripline Development 321 California Black Walnut (13”) Multi-stemmed Remove Poor health 322 Valley Oak (13”) Work w/in dripline Development 323 Valley Oak (12”) Work w/in dripline Development 324 Olive (18”) Work w/in dripline Development 325 Almond (18”) Multi-stemmed Remove Poor health 326 California Black Walnut (20”) Remove Development 327 Valley Oak (24”) Work w/in dripline Development 328 Valley Oak (11”) Work w/in dripline Development 330 Plum (10”) Remove Poor health 331 Almond (11”) Work w/in dripline Development 332 Valley Oak (18”) Remove Development 333 Almond (12”) Multi-stemmed Remove Poor health 334 Valley Oak (15”) Work w/in dripline Development 335 Valley Oak (19”) Remove Development 338 Valley Oak (20”) Work w/in dripline Development 339 Valley Oak (8”) Work w/in dripline Development 340 Valley Oak (9”) Remove Development 341 Valley Oak (13”) Remove Development 342 Valley Oak (21”) Remove Development 343 Valley Oak (17”) Remove Development 344 Pecan (20”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 345 Pecan (7”) Remove Development 346 Valley Oak (15”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 347 Pecan (31”) Remove Development 348 English Hawthorn (20”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 349 Pepper (54”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 350 California Black Walnut (22”) Remove Development 351 California Black Walnut (22”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development Page 14 of 44 352 California Black Walnut (32”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 353 English Walnut (10”) Remove Development 354 Apricot (7”) Remove Development 355 Persimmon (18”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 356 Valley Oak (18”) Remove Development 357 Pecan (37”) Remove Development 358 Valley Oak (22”) Remove Development 359 Holly Oak (12”) Remove Development 360 Holly Oak (14”) Remove Development 361 Valley Oak (14”) Remove Development 362 Privet (20”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 363 Holly Oak (7”) Remove Development 364 Privet (7”) Remove Development 365 Privet (18”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 366 Holly Oak (7”) Remove Development 367 California Black Walnut (14”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 368 Privet (28”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 369 Almond (19”) Multi-stemmed Development 370 California Black Walnut (19”) Remove Development 371 English Walnut (18”) Remove Development 372 California Black Walnut (14”) Remove Development 373 English Walnut (26”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 374 Almond (28”) Multi-stemmed Remove Development 5. The maximum number of lots approved for this subdivision is 10 residential lots. Application Fees 6. This application is subject to an initial application deposit of $10,000, which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and materials costs if the application review expenses exceed 100% if the initial deposit. Any additional costs due must be paid within 60 days of the permit effective date or prior to use of the permit, Page 15 of 44 whichever occurs first. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. Indemnification 7. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 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 provided in Section 66499.37. The County will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. Compliance Report 8. A permit compliance report shall be submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) for review and approval. The report shall identify all conditions of approval that are administered by the CDD. The report shall document the measures to be taken to satisfy all relevant conditions. Unless otherwise indicated, the permit compliance report will be required to demonstrate compliance with the applicable conditions of this report prior to filing the Final Map or planning approval of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first. The permit compliance report will be filed and reviewed through a Condition of Approval Compliance Check application with an initial deposit of $2,000 (subject to time and materials). Fencing 9. Prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, a fencing plan program shall be submitted to CDD for the review and approval. The approved program shall be attached to the CC&Rs. Page 16 of 44 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) 10. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall be submitted to CDD for review and approval. This document shall include the maintenance obligation requirements of Public Works condition(s) of approval. The CC&Rs shall also require occupants to maintain garage spaces in a manner, which makes them available for off-street parking. Signs/Walls 11. Prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, the details of the design, location, color and type of materials for any proposed signs and/or masonry walls shall be submitted to CDD for review and approval. Park Impact Fee 12. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the applicable park impact fee as established by the Board of Supervisors shall be paid. Park Dedication Fee 13. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a new residence, the applicable park dedication fee as established by the Board of Supervisors shall be paid. Child Care 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a new residence, a fee for childcare facility needs in the area, as established by the Board of Supervisors, shall be paid. Police Services District 15. Election for Establishment of a Police Services District to Augment Police Services: Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, 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 per parcel annual amount (with appropriate future CPI adjustment) established at the time of voting by the Board of Supervisors. The election to provide for the tax shall be completed prior to filing the Final Map. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of holding the election, payable at Page 17 of 44 the time the election is requested by the owner. Allow a minimum of three to four months for processing. Exterior Lighting 16. Prior to planning approval of a building permit, a Lighting Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: a. All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and streetlights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. b. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. (AES-1) Biological Resources 17. If project construction-related activities take place during the nesting season (February through August), an avian pre-construction survey for nesting passerine birds and raptors (birds of prey) within the project site and the trees within the adjacent riparian area shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist no more than 14 days prior to the commencement of the tree removal or project construction-related activities. If any bird listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) is found to be nesting within the project site or within the area of influence, an adequate protective buffer zone shall be established by a qualified Biologist to protect the nesting site. This buffer shall be a minimum of 75 feet from the project activities for passerine birds, and a minimum of 200 feet for raptors. The distance shall be determined by a qualified Biologist based on the site conditions (topography, if the nest is in a line of sight of the construction and the sensitivity of the birds nesting). The nest site(s) shall be monitored by a qualified Biologist periodically to see if the birds are stressed by the construction activities and if the protective buffer needs to be increased. Once the young have fledged and are flying well enough to avoid project construction zones (typically by August), a qualified Biologist shall determine if the project can proceed Page 18 of 44 without further regard to the nest site(s). Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the CDD shall determine if project construction-related activities will take place during the nesting season, and if so, the avian pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. (MM BIO-1) 18. If project construction-related activities take place during seasonal periods of bat activity (mid–February through mid–October – ca. February 15–April 15, and August 15–October 30), a bat habitat assessment within the project site shall be conducted by a qualified Bat Biologist to determine suitability of each tree or existing structure as bat roost habitat. Structures found to have no suitable openings can be considered clear for project activities as long as they are maintained so that new openings do not occur. Structures found to provide suitable roosting habitat, but without evidence of use by bats, may be sealed until project activities occur, as recommended by the Bat Biologist. Structures with openings and exhibiting evidence of use by bats shall be scheduled for humane bat exclusion and eviction, conducted during appropriate seasons, and under supervision of a qualified Bat Biologist. Bat exclusion and eviction shall only occur between February 15 and April 15, and from August 15 through October 30, in order to avoid take of non-volant (non-flying or inactive, either young, or seasonally torpid) individuals. Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the CDD shall determine if project construction-related activities will take place during seasonal periods of bat activity, and if so, the bat habitat assessment shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. (MM BIO-2) 19. A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be conducted no more than 48 hours prior to the commencement of tree removal or project construction related activities to determine presence/absence of these species. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the reptile pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. (MM BIO-3) Page 19 of 44 20. No work (including vegetation removal) shall take place within the riparian corridor and ephemeral drainage as indicated in the Biological Resource Analysis (BRA) Report completed by Olberding Environmental, Inc (Olberding) dated January 2023, unless evidence is provided to the CDD that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) reviewed and approved work within these areas. The plan set for a building permit shall show fencing that is approved by a qualified biologist to ensure work does not take place in this area. As-built photos shall be required prior to issuance of a grading or building permit to ensure that this fencing is installed. (MM BIO-4) 21. At no time shall silt-laden runoff be allowed to enter on-site aquatic features and their associated habitats. Erosion control measures shall be utilized throughout all phases of operation where sediment runoff from the project may enter these aquatic features. Best Management Practices (BMPs) to avoid erosion, uncontrolled stormwater runoff and bank deterioration shall be implemented, following the requirements of the proposed project’s Stormwater Control Plan, and typically include silt fencing, coir rolls, and/or straw bale dikes. (MM BIO-5) 22. No substances toxic to fish and wildlife shall be discharged or allowed to leach into the aquatic features present on-site. Materials deleterious or toxic to fish and wildlife, including, but not limited to, asphalt, tires, concrete, construction materials, treated wood, and creosote containing materials, shall not be stockpiled within 100 feet of any aquatic feature present on-site. (MM BIO-6) Restitution for Tree Removal 23. The following measures are intended to provide restitution for the removal of 43 code-protected trees: A. Tree Replacement Plan: Prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit a Tree Replacement Plan prepared by a licensed arborist or landscape architect for the review and approval of CDD. The Plan shall provide for the planting of at least 20 trees, minimum 15-gallons in size. The Plan shall show trees to be planted along Walnut Boulevard, and to provide screening between lots 5 and 6 and the neighboring properties, and shall be implemented prior to requesting a final inspection of the residential building permit for each lot. Page 20 of 44 B. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit a security (e.g., bond, cash deposit) that is acceptable to CDD to ensure that the Tree Replacement Plan is implemented. Determination of Security Amount: The security shall provide for a breakdown of all of the following costs: • A labor and materials estimate for planting the 20 trees, minimum 15- gallons in size, and related irrigation improvements that may be required, prepared by a licensed landscape architect or landscape contractor. • An additional 20% of the total of the above amounts to address inflation costs. C. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security: The County ordinance requires that the applicant pay fees to cover all staff time and material costs of staff for processing the landscape improvement security. At the time of submittal of the security, the applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $200. D. Duration of Security: The security bond for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months following final building inspection. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree(s) intended to be protected has been damaged, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. (MM BIO-7) 24. Tree removal shall occur only with an approved grading or building permit. Page 21 of 44 Contingency Restitution for Work Within the Dripline 25. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 816-6.1204 of the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, to address the possibility that construction activity nevertheless damages the tree(s) where work is within their dripline, the applicant shall provide the County with a security (e.g. bond, cash deposit) prior to planning approval of a grading or building permit, to allow for replacement of tree(s) intended to be preserved that are significantly damaged by construction activity. The security shall be based on: A. Extent of Possible Restitution Improvements – The planting of at least 20 trees, minimum 15-gallons in size, in the vicinity of the affected tree(s), or equivalent planting contribution, and subject to prior review and approval of CDD. B. Determination of Security Amount: The security shall be submitted for each lot and provide for all of the following costs: • A labor and materials estimate for planting 20 trees, minimum 15-gallons in size, and related irrigation improvements that may be required, prepared by a licensed landscape architect or landscape contractor. • An additional 20% of the total of the above amounts to address inflation costs. C. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security – The County Ordinance requires that the applicant cover all time and material costs of staff for processing a tree protection security. The Applicant shall pay an initial fee deposit of $200 at time of submittal of a security. D. Duration of Security: The security bond for each lot shall be retained by the County for a minimum of 12 months up to 24 months following final building inspection. A prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12 and 24 months shall be to have the applicant arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the tree(s) and to prepare a report on the trees’ health. In the event that CDD determines that the tree intended to be protected has been damaged by development activity, and CDD determines that the applicant has not been diligent in providing reasonable restitution of the damaged trees, then CDD may require that all part of the security be used to provide for mitigation of the Page 22 of 44 damaged tree(s). Should one security be submitted for all lots, the security may be released upon complying with the requirements stated above and upon approval of a final inspection for the last lot constructed. (MM BIO-8) Tree Protection The following Tree Protection conditions shall be implemented during project construction and shall be stated on the site plan for building permit(s) as construction notes: 26. The Tree Protection Recommendations (TPR) from the approved arborist report shall be present in the construction plans to be submitted for a building permit application, and shall be executed onsite during all phases of construction. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the tree protective fencing as depicted in the approved arborist report shall be installed onsite. Color photographs of the installed fencing shall be submitted to CDD staff as evidence that this condition has been satisfied. 28. Storage or parking vehicles, building materials, refuse, excavated spoils, or dumping of paint or poisonous materials on or around trees and roots is prohibited. 29. Any construction activities that occur within the dripline of a tree, an arborist should be present. The arborist shall have the authority to require implementation of measures to protect the tree(s). 30. The applicant shall immediately notify CDD staff of any damage that occurs to any tree during construction. Any tree not approved for destruction or removal that dies or is significantly damaged as a result of this project shall be replaced with a tree or trees of equivalent size and of a species as approved by the CDD to be reasonably appropriate for the situation. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) 31. Prior to planning approval of a building permit for a new residence, a completed WELO Part I for the landscaping specific to that property, shall be submitted to Page 23 of 44 CDD for review and approval. The approved Landscaping Plans under WELO Part I shall be present in the plans for a building permit. 32. Prior to final building inspection, a completed WELO Part II – Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to CDD staff for review and approval. 33. All landscaping shall comply with California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495) and/or any applicable State mandated landscape/water related requirements applicable at the time of landscaping installation for the project. To the maximum extent feasible, landscaping plans shall use drought tolerant vegetation for the development. Air Quality 34. The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction mitigation measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be stated on the plans for building permit(s) as construction notes: a. All exposed non-paved surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered at least two times per day and/or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to exposed non-paved surfaces. b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered and/or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard. c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage regarding idling restrictions shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. Page 24 of 44 h. The prime construction contractor shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall take corrective action within 48 hours of receipt of the complaint. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. A copy of this sign shall be provided to the Community Development Division (CDD). (MM AIR-1) 35. The following Mitigation Measure shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans: a. All off-road equipment equal to or greater than 25 horsepower shall meet either United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or California Air Resources Board (ARB) Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards during all construction activities. b. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, a construction management plan shall be submitted to the CDD for review and approval. The construction management plan shall demonstrate that the off-road equipment used on-site to construct the proposed project would comply with Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards. Off-road equipment descriptions and information included in the construction management plan should include, but is not limited to, equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number47T47T. (MM AIR-2) Cultural Resources The following Cultural Resources mitigation measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be stated on the plans for building permit(s) as construction notes: 36. All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the plans for grading permit(s) as construction notes to inform contractors of this requirement. Page 25 of 44 Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the County concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. (MM CUL-1) 37. In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: A. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. B. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. Page 26 of 44 • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. (MM CUL-3) Geology 38. Prior to submittal of a building or grading permit, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. (MM GEO-1) 39. The applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, evidence shall be provided to CDD that a qualified paleontologist is contracted to implement this mitigation measure. (MM GEO-2) Page 27 of 44 Construction Restrictions The following Construction Restrictions shall be implemented during project construction and shall be stated on the plans for building permit(s) as construction notes: (MM NOI-1) 40. Unless specifically approved otherwise via prior authorization from the Zoning Administrator, all construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and are prohibited on 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) Juneteenth National Independence Holiday (Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day (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: Federal Holidays (opm.gov) California Holidays: http://www.ftb.ca.gov/aboutftb/holidays.shtml Transportation of large trucks and heavy equipment is subject to the same restrictions that are imposed on construction activities, except that the hours are limited to 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM. Page 28 of 44 41. Contractor and/or developer shall comply with the following construction requirements: A. The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. B. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. C. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. D. At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. E. The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. Street Names 42. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, proposed name(s) shall be submitted for review by the Department of Conservation and Development, GIS/Mapping Section. Alternate street names should be submitted. The Final Map cannot be certified by CDD without the approved street names. Power Lines 43. Where a lot is located within 300 feet of a high voltage electric transmission line, the applicant shall record the following as a deed disclosure: “The subject property is located near a high voltage electric transmission line. Purchasers should be aware that there is ongoing research on possible potential adverse health effects caused by the exposure to a magnetic field generated by high voltage lines. Although much more research is needed before the question of whether magnetic fields actually cause adverse health effects can be resolved, the Page 29 of 44 basis for such a hypothesis is established. At this time no risk assessment has been made.” When a Final Subdivision Report issued by the California Department of Real Estate is required, the applicant shall also request that the Department of Real Estate insert the above note in the report. Will Serve Letters 44. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from East Bay Municipal Utility District shall be submitted to CDD. 45. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a copy of a will-serve letter from Central Contra Costa Sanitary District shall be submitted to CDD. Electric Vehicle 46. In accordance with the County’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Ordinance, a listed raceway to accommodate a dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit shall be installed for each new residence. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT (HCI) DIVISION, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09581 47. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance: This project is subject to County Ordinance Code, Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Terms and definitions regarding the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance are pursuant to this chapter. Pursuant to Section 822-4.402(b) of the County Ordinance Code, a residential development of five or more for-sale units shall require at least fifteen percent of the for-sale units to be developed and sold as affordable units. At least twenty percent of the inclusionary units shall be sold at an affordable price to lower-income households. The remaining inclusionary units shall be sold to moderate-income families at an affordable price. 48. For-Sale Inclusionary Housing and Partial In-Lieu Fee: The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 1.35 affordable units (9 total base Page 30 of 44 units x 0.15 of total = 1.35 units) for the project. The Applicant has submitted a revised project proposal that included an Inclusionary Housing Plan and density bonus request dated March 22, 2022, that proposed to construct one for-sale moderate income inclusionary unit (affordable to households with an income up to 120% of Area Median Income) on Lot 4 of the property. The unit on Lot 4 is an approximately 2,533-square-foot single-family detached home consisting of four bedrooms. The one moderate-income unit proposed for compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements is the same moderate-income unit required for compliance with the Density Bonus request. This unit may be referenced as inclusionary unit, density bonus unit, or both in these conditions. The requirements for the one moderate-income unit must comply with both the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and State Density Bonus law, and the most restrictive requirements would apply. The Applicant has proposed to pay a partial in-lieu fee for the fractional 0.35 inclusionary unit, and the County has accepted this proposal. The current calculation of the partial in-lieu fee for the fractional inclusionary unit is $15,444.00. The final calculation of the in-lieu fee will be calculated upon payment. This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferable. A partial in-lieu fee of $15,444.00 will be paid for the fractional .35 unit (.35 = 26% of the fee total of $59,401. 26% of this fee = $15,444.00) 49. Density Bonus Request: The Applicant submitted a revised project description which included a density bonus request dated March 22, 2022. The Applicant proposed constructing one moderate-income unit, constituting 15 percent of the total for-sale units in the development. 50. Density Bonus – Concession or Incentive: Pursuant to Government Code 65915(d), the Applicant may request one project concession or incentive for providing 15 percent (one unit) for moderate-income units of the total units within the for-sale housing development. The Applicant requested the concession to utilize gross acreage to calculate the maximum density allowed for the site instead of using the net acreage as required in the General Plan. Page 31 of 44 The County accepted the Applicant’s request to use gross acreage when calculating the maximum base density allowed on the property and density bonus. This allowed for a maximum revised base density of nine units. When combined with a 10 percent density bonus (one additional unit), the result is ten total units in the housing development. 51. Density Bonus – Reduction in Development Standards: Pursuant to Government Code 65915(e), the Applicant proposed a waiver or reduction of the following development standards: • Lot Area – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum parcel size of 20,000 square feet, the proposed lot sizes range from 9,292 to 17,659 square feet. • Lot Width – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum average lot width of 120 feet, the proposed average lot widths range from 66.4 to 138.8 feet. • Lot Depth – where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum of 120 feet in depth, the proposed lot depths range from 127.2 to 174.1 feet. The lot depths for all proposed lots comply with the minimum requirement as proposed. • Housing setbacks - where the County Ordinance Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 25 feet, a minimum side yard of 15 feet, and a minimum aggregate side yard of 35 feet, the proposed front yard setbacks and side yards are per the table under condition of approval #3. • Retaining Wall Structure Setbacks – where the County Ordinance Code considers all retaining walls over three feet as a structure that must meet all setback requirements, the proposed retaining wall setback is 0 feet on all lots. 52. Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement: Prior to recordation of the Final Map or submittal of CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first, the Applicant shall execute an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided Page 32 of 44 by the County, with the County pursuant to Chapter 822-4 Inclusionary Housing, Chapter 822-2 Density Bonus, and Government Code 95915 to ensure that the property will be deed restricted for one unit to be affordable and sold to a moderate income household. The Applicant should allow for a minimum 90-day period for the preparation, County approval, and recordation of the Agreement prior to the milestones referenced above. To initiate the County to prepare and execute an Agreement, the Applicant must file a condition of approval compliance review application accompanied by the appropriate fees, documents, and exhibits listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist and/or Density Bonus Plan Checklist. The Agreement must be submitted to the Board of Supervisors before execution by all parties and recordation. The Agreement will establish the process for determining the unit’s maximum sales price, buyer eligibility, and additional program details as referenced in Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and Government Code 65915. A detailed timeline for the project, including the project’s construction, marketing, the Applicant accepting and reviewing applications from qualified households, and the sale of the inclusionary unit. 53. General: The following are general terms for granting a density bonus and compliance with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. a. The Applicant hereby represents warrants and covenants that will cause the Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County, California, and other places the County may reasonably request. The Applicant shall pay fees incurred with any such recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the document by the County and before the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first. b. The one inclusionary unit in the project shall be available for sale to members of the general public who are income eligible. The Applicant shall not give preference to any particular class or group of persons in selling the units, except that the units must be sold to a household with income no higher than 120% of the Area Median Income. There shall be no discrimination against or Page 33 of 44 segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), age (except for lawful senior housing), ancestry, or disability, in the sale of the unit in the project nor shall the Applicant or any person claiming under or through the Applicant, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation concerning the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of homeowners of any unit in connection with employment of persons for construction of the project. c. County will provide the Applicant with income certification forms to be completed by the potential homebuyers. The income levels of all moderate- income household applicants for the inclusionary/density bonus unit shall be pre-certified by the Applicant (or subsequent holder of the Agreement(s)) prior to submittal to the County for review and approval. d. Upon violating any of the Agreement’s provisions by the Applicant, the County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the breach. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a reasonable period, not longer than thirty (30) days after the date the notice is deemed received, or within such further time as the County determines is necessary to correct the violation, the County may declare a default under the Agreement. Upon declaration of a default or if the County determines that the Applicant has made any misrepresentation in connection with receiving any benefits under this Agreement, the County may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for such relief at law or in equity as may be appropriate. 54. Term of Affordability: The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted so that if the home is sold within forty-five (45) years, it must be sold at an affordable sales price to a moderate-income household. The inclusionary unit shall be deed-restricted upon sale to ensure the continued affordability of this unit for the required term of affordability in accordance with Government Code 65915. 55. Development Standards: The inclusionary unit must be constructed and finished in compliance with the approved Inclusionary Housing Plan. The unit is subject to the standards of Section 822.4.412 of the County Ordinance. a. The inclusionary unit must be constructed and occupied before or concurrently with the market rate units within the same residential development. A hold will Page 34 of 44 be placed on the final inspection/occupancy for all building permits issued within the subdivision to ensure that the inclusionary/density bonus unit meets this requirement. b. The average number of bedrooms for the inclusionary unit must be equivalent to the average number of bedrooms for market-rate units within the same residential development. 56. Marketing and Homebuyer Selection: It is anticipated that the Applicant will construct all project units and market them before construction completion. The Applicant shall submit documentation and other information to the County for review and approval at least 90 days prior to construction completion and prior to the Applicant’s request for a final building inspection and final occupancy of the building. The documentation and information required for review and approval are listed in the most recent Inclusionary Housing Plan Checklist or Density Bonus Plan Checklist and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Marketing Plan b. Homebuyer Selection Plan. The homebuyer selection plan should include a provision for a lottery process for the inclusionary/density bonus unit. c. Marketing Materials, including translated Marketing Materials in Spanish and Chinese. In addition to other marketing efforts proposed by the Applicant in the marketing plan, the inclusionary unit shall be marketed through local, non-profit, social service, faith-based, and other organizations with potential buyers as clients or constituents. Marketing materials shall be made available online for at least one month before the first sale and shared with County Housing staff to promote to its mailing lists. The Applicant shall translate marketing materials, and the marketing plan shall be submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development before marketing the inclusionary housing unit. Marketing may also include publicity through local television and radio stations as well as local newspapers, including the Contra Costa Times, Classified Flea Market, El Mensajero, La Opinion, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily. 57. Marketing and Homebuyer Selection: The developer shall refer all qualified homebuyers to a HUD Homebuyer Counselor prior to the sale of the inclusionary unit. Page 35 of 44 58. For-Sale Inclusionary/Density Bonus Unit Restrictions: The initial sale of a for-sale inclusionary unit shall occur only to a household that meets the following criteria: a. The household has not owned a residence within the previous three years; and b. The household has no more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars in assets. The amount excludes assets reserved for a down payment and closing costs, assets in retirement savings accounts, and medical savings accounts. c. The purchaser of the for-sale inclusionary/density bonus unit must agree to occupy the dwelling unit as their principal residence. d. The term of affordability for the inclusionary/density bonus unit is 45 years. The for-sale inclusionary unit may be resold after the initial sale to a moderate- income purchaser at a moderate-income sales price. If a moderate-income purchaser cannot be found after diligently marketing the unit widely and after a period determined by DCD, the unit may be sold to an above-moderate-income purchaser at a market price, provided that the sale results in a recapture by the County of financial interest in the unit equal to the sum of: The difference between the initial affordable sales price and the appraised market value of the unit at the time of the initial sale; and The County’s proportionate share of any appreciation since the time of the initial sale. Appreciation is the difference between the resale price to the above- moderate-income purchaser and the appraised market value at the initial sale. The County’s proportionate share of appreciation is equal to the percentage by which the initial affordable sales price was less than the appraised market value at the time of the initial sale. 59. Prequalification of Homebuyers and Compliance Review: The Applicant is responsible for marketing and prequalifying potential homebuyers for income qualification. The Applicant shall submit for DCD’s review and prequalification prior to the initial sale of the inclusionary/density bonus unit, and the Applicant shall submit to the Department of Conservation and Development for review and approval, all forms, and documentation demonstrating that the buyer of the unit is Page 36 of 44 qualified as a moderate-income household. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection/ occupancy of all building permits associated with the construction of the residences in the project until documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of Conservation and Development. To initiate this prequalification review, the applicant must file a COA Compliance Review Application if there is no open compliance review application for this project. 60. Prequalification of Homebuyers and Compliance Review: The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and Development informed of the contact information of the owner or designee responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be contacted (i.e., mailing addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers) at all times. a. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, Parcel Map, or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits or grading permits for any portion of the residential development, whichever comes first, and with filing a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the name of the contact representing the property owner for permit compliance and their contact information. b. Should the contact subsequently change (e.g., new designee or owner), within 30 days of the change, the Applicant shall issue a letter to the Department of Conservation and Development with the name of the new party who has been assigned permit compliance responsibility and their contact information. Failure to satisfy this condition may result in the commencement of procedures to revoke the permit. PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDSD21-09581 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9 and Title 10 of the Ordinance Code. Any exceptions must be stipulated in these Conditions of Approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the site plan/(vesting) tentative map submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development on September 2, 2021. Page 37 of 44 COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO FILING OF THE FINAL MAP. General Requirements 61. 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 vesting tentative map received by the Department of Conservation and Development, Community Development Division, on June 27, 2022. 62. Applicant shall submit improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer to the Public Works Department and pay appropriate fees in accordance with the County Ordinance and these conditions of approval. The below conditions of approval are subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department. Roadway Improvements (Walnut Boulevard) 63. Applicant shall construct curb, 5-foot sidewalk, necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage, street lighting, and pavement widening and transitions along the frontage of Walnut Boulevard. Applicant shall construct face of curb 10 feet from the widened right of way line. 64. Applicant shall construct a street type connection with 20-foot radii curb returns in lieu of standard driveway depressions at intersection of Walnut Boulevard and Private Street A. Road Dedications 65. Property owner(s) shall convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, 7 feet of right-of-way for the planned future width of 64 feet along the Walnut Boulevard frontage. Page 38 of 44 Access to Adjoining Property 66. Proof of Access: Applicant shall furnish proof to the Public Works Department 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. Encroachment Permit 67. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department, if necessary, for construction of driveways or other improvements within the right- of-way of Walnut Boulevard. 68. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment or other applicable permits from the City of Walnut Creek, if necessary, for construction of off-site utilities our improvements within the corporate limits of the City of Walnut Creek. Abutter’s Rights 69. Applicant shall relinquish abutter’s rights of access along Walnut Boulevard frontage with the exception of the proposed private road intersection. Sight Distance 70. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the private road intersection with Walnut Blvd. for a design speed of 30 miles per hour. Private Roads 71. Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system to current County private road standards with a travel width of 28 feet, and a 5-foot sidewalk monolithic to the curb. These improvements shall be located within a minimum 35-foot private access and utility easement. Additional easement width may be necessary to accommodate utility boxes, vaults, etc. Page 39 of 44 Parking 72. Parking shall be prohibited on one side of on-site roadways where the curb-to-curb width is less than 36 feet and on both sides of on-site roadways where the curb-to- curb width is less than 28 feet. “No Parking” signs shall be installed along these portions of the roads subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department. Countywide Street Lights Financing 73. Property owner(s) shall annex to the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2010-1 formed for Countywide Street Light Financing. Annexation into a streetlight service area does not include the transfer of ownership and maintenance of street lighting on private roads. Utilities/Undergrounding 74. Applicant shall underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities, including those along the frontage of Walnut Boulevard Applicant shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground electrical, gas, telephone, cable television and communication conduits and cables including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. The composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans shall be signed by a licensed civil engineer. Exceptions (Subject to Advisory Agency findings and approval) Applicant is granted an exception from the utility undergrounding requirement of the Ordinance Code by the advisory agency as provided for in 92-6.002 of said Code. This exception is specific to the Walnut Boulevard frontage and does not preclude relocation of exiting overhead utilities in conflict with required street improvements. because of the several parcels involved and the nature of the area. Maintenance of Facilities 75. The maintenance obligation of all common and open space areas, private roadways, any private streetlights, public and private landscaped areas, perimeter walls/fences, Page 40 of 44 and on-site drainage facilities shall be included in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs). The language shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator and Public Works Department at least 60 days prior to filing of the Final Map. Drainage Improvements 76. Collect and Convey: 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 system which conveys the stormwater to a natural watercourse, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. Applicant shall verify the adequacy at any downstream drainage facility accepting stormwater from this project prior to discharging runoff. If the downstream system(s) is inadequate to handle the existing and project condition for the required design storm event, applicant shall construct improvements to make the system adequate. Applicant shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. Exceptions (Subject to Advisory Agency findings and approval) Applicant is granted an exception from the utility undergrounding requirement of the Ordinance Code by the advisory agency as provided for in 92-6.002 of said Code. 77. Detention Basin: The proposed joint use of the drainage basin for both stormwater management, and peak runoff rate reduction will be allowed provided the stormwater management aspects of the basin are not included in the storage volume accounting relative to detention basin routing. Exceptions (Subject to Advisory Agency findings and approval) Applicant is granted an exception from the public entity maintenance requirement of the Ordinance Code by the advisory agency as provided for in 92-6.002 of said Code. The maintenance obligation relative to the detention/stormwater management basin will be satisfied in the CC&Rs and Stormwater Maintenance Operation and Maintenance Agreement and Plan. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements 78. Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards. Page 41 of 44 79. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner. 80. A private storm drain easement, conforming to the width specified in Section 914- 14.004 of the County Ordinance Code, shall be dedicated over any proposed storm drain line that serves or traverses more than one lot or parcel. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 81. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (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). Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMPs) for the reduction or elimination of stormwater pollutants. The project design shall incorporate wherever feasible, the following long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program for the site's stormwater drainage: - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Install approved full trash capture devices on all catch basins (excluding catch basins within bioretention area) as reviewed and approved by Public Works Department. Trash capture devices shall meet the requirements of the County’s NPDES permit. - Install approved full trash capture devices on all catch basins (excluding catch basins within bioretention area) as reviewed and approved by Public Works Department. Trash capture devices shall meet the requirements of the County’s NPDES Permit. - Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain markers. - Offer pavers for household driveways and/or walkways as an option to buyers. - Construct concrete driveway weakened plane joints at angles to assist in directing run-off to landscaped/pervious areas prior to entering the street curb and gutter. - Distribute public information items regarding the Clean Water Program and lot specific IMPs to buyers. - Shared trash bins shall be sealed to prevent leakage, OR, shall be located within a covered enclosure. - Other alternatives comparable to the above as approved by Public Works. Page 42 of 44 Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance 82. The applicant shall submit a final Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) and a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance Plan (O+M Plan) to the Public Works Department, which shall be reviewed for compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and shall be deemed consistent with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014) prior to filing of the Final Map. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant. 83. Improvement plans shall be reviewed to verify consistency with the final SWCP and compliance with Provision C.3 of the County’s NPDES Permit and the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (§1014). 84. Stormwater management facilities shall be subject to inspection by the Public Works Department; all time and materials costs for inspection of stormwater management facilities shall be borne by the applicant. 85. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall enter into a Stormwater Management Facility Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra Costa County, in which the property owner(s) shall accept responsibility for and related to the operation and maintenance of the stormwater facilities, and grant access to relevant public agencies for inspection of stormwater management facilities. 86. Prior to filing of the Final Map, the property owner(s) shall annex the subject property into Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2007-1 (Stormwater Management Facilities), which funds responsibilities of Contra Costa County under its NPDES Permit to oversee the ongoing operation and maintenance of stormwater facilities by property owners. 87. Any proposed water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer than 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. Page 43 of 44 Drainage Area Fee Ordinance 88. Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 8 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors prior to initiation of the use requested with this application. This fee shall be paid prior to filing of the Final Map. ADVISORY NOTES ADVISORY NOTES ARE NOT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; THEY ARE PROVIDED TO ALERT THE APPLICANT TO ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES, STATUTES, AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT. A. NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, ASSESSMENTS, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations, or exactions required as part of this project approval. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant to Government Code Section 66020 and must be delivered to the Community Development Division within a 90-day period that begins on the date that this project is approved. If the 90th day falls on a day that the Community Development Division is closed, then the protest must be submitted by the end of the next business day. B. This project is subject to the development fees in effect under County Ordinance as July 27, 2022, the date the vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Department of Conservation and Development. These fees are in addition to any other development fees, which may be specified in the conditions of approval. C. Applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Martinez Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Payment is required prior to issuance of a building permit. Page 44 of 44 D. Although the Stormwater Control Plan has been determined to be preliminarily complete, it remains subject to future revision, as necessary, during preparation of improvement plans in order to bring it into full compliance with C.3 stormwater requirements. Failure to update the SWCP to match any revisions made in the improvement plans may result in a substantial change to the County approval, and the project may be subject to additional public hearings. Revisions to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents may also be required. This may significantly increase the time and applicant’s costs associated with approval of the application. E. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the following agencies: - Contra Costa County Public Works Department - Department of Fish and Wildlife - Army Corps of Engineers - Contra Costa County, Department of Conservation and Development, Building and Grading Inspection Divisions - Contra Costa County Fire Protection District - Central Contra Costa Sanitary District - East Bay Municipal Utility District 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1.Project Title:3180 Walnut Boulevard 10-Lot Subdivision (County File #CDSD21-09581) 2.Lead Agency Name and Address:Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 3.Contact Person and Phone Number:Dominique Vogelpohl (925) 655-2880 Dominique.Vogelpohl@dcd.cccounty.us 4.Project Location:3180 Walnut Boulevard Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 180-240-002 5.Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde 1908 Cambridge Place Walnut Creek, CA 94598 6.General Plan Designation:The project site is located within the Single- Family Residential – Low Density (SL) General Plan Land Use designation. 7.Zoning:The project site is located within the R-20 Single-Family Residential (R-20) District. 8.Description of Project: The applicant is requesting approval of a vesting tentative map for a subdivision which proposes to subdivide the approximately 2.88-acre project site into 10 lots ranging in size from 9,292 to 17,659 square feet due to the use of California Density Bonus Law,Government Code Section 65915, which is explained further under Density Bonus. On each new lot, a 2-story, 3 to 5-bedroom single-family residence ranging in footprint size of approximately 2,442 to 2,913 square feet, is expected to be constructed (Exhibit 5, Exhibit 6). The proposed project would include a new private street to allow access to the site. Implementation of the project could include more than 15,000 cubic yards of grading. The project also includes exception requests to County Code Section 96-10 that requires utilities to be undergrounded, and Section 914-12.002 that requires detention basins to be at least 15 acre-feet of storage volume. Density Bonus The Density Bonus Law (found in California Government Code Sections 65915–65918) requires cities and counties to provide incentives or other concessions to housing developments to produce housing for very low income, lower income, moderate income, or senior housing to facilitate the development of affordable housing. A density bonus is provided to housing development projects that comply with at least one of the following criteria: •At least 5 percent of the housing units are restricted to very low income residents. •At least 10 percent of the housing units are restricted to lower income residents. •At least 10 percent of the housing units in a for-sale common interest development are restricted to moderate income residents. Density Bonus requests are processed pursuant to Section 65915 et seq. of the California Government Code and Title 8, Division 822, Chapter 822-2 (Residential Density Bonus) of the Ordinance Code. The proposed project would restrict the home on Lot 4 for moderate income residents, meeting the requirement that at least 10 percent of the housing units be restricted to moderate income residents. As a result, the proposed project is eligible for a density bonus pursuant to the Residential Density Bonus Ordinance of the Ordinance Code. The calculations detailed below support the proposed project’s eligibility under the Density Bonus Law. Density Bonus Calculations •Project site: 2.46 net acres (proposed right-of-way and road area is deducted) •Gross site: 2.88 acres •Base project: (2.88 acres) * (2.9 du/acre) = 8.35 du, fractional unit rounded to nine base units •Target Unit(s): provide moderate income deed restricted on Lot 4 •Percent of Base Units: (1 moderate income unit)/(9 base units) = 12 percent of base units moderate income deed restricted •Density Bonus Result: 12 percent moderate income deed restricted unit(s) qualifies for 7 percent density bonus •Density Bonus Calculation: (9 d/u) * (0.07) = 0.63 d/u, fractional unit rounded to 1 d/u Because the proposed project complies with the Density Bonus Law under California Government Code Section 65915, the applicant seeks approval of a concession to utilize gross acreage for the density calculation. A concession or incentive is defined as a reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements, such as a reduction in setback or minimum square footage requirements; or approval of mixed- use zoning; or other regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. The table below includes a breakdown of the lot sizes and size of each proposed home. Because the proposed project complies with the Density Bonus Law under California Government Code Section 65915, the applicant seeks approval to waivers from R-20 development standards. The applicant proposes the following development standards listed below. 3 Project Summary and Alternative Development Standards Lot # Lot Area (20,000 square feet minimum) Footprint Area in square feet Depth (120 feet minimum) Average Width (120 feet minimum) Front yard Setback (25 feet minimum) Side Yard Setback (15 feet, 35 feet aggregate, minimum) Retaining Walls (structure setbacks in feet) Lot 1 9,645 2,483 145.3 66.4 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 2 10,889 2,533 168.6 64.6 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 3 11,731 2,913 174.1 67.4 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 4* 10,764 2,533 150.6 71.5 1 foot to shunt turn around; 20 feet from street 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 5 13,270 2,533 132 100.5 20 feet to face of garage; 10 feet to living area 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 6 17,659 2,483 127.2 138.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 7 9,292 2,533 130.9 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot # Lot Area (20,000 square feet minimum) Footprint Area in square feet Depth (120 feet minimum) Average Width (120 feet minimum) Front yard Setback (25 feet minimum) Side Yard Setback (15 feet, 35 feet aggregate, minimum) Retaining Walls (structure setbacks in feet) Lot 8 9,555 2,913 134.5 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 9 9,819 2,442 138.2 71 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Lot 10 15,797 2,533 141.3 111.8 20 15 feet aggregate, (no yard less than 5 feet) 0 Notes: *Designated as an affordable unit. Site Access and Parking Regional access to the site is provided via I-680, by way of Ygnacio Valley Road. Local access to the project site would be provided via Walnut Boulevard and a new private street. The new private street would be approximately 28 feet wide, with an 8-foot parking lane on one side and 5-foot side walk along the southeast section of the proposed road way, as required by Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) standards. The proposed project would include an emergency vehicle access turnaround within Lot 4. In addition to street parking, each home would include garage space for 3 to 5 cars. Roadway and Frontage Improvements The proposed project would include approximately 0.16 acres of public road way dedication along Walnut Boulevard. Other frontage improvements would consist of approximately 927 square feet of sidewalk improvements. 5 Trees The site currently contains 74 trees protected under the Contra Costa Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. In total, 30 of the 73 existing trees would be retained and would be protected during construction. Landscaping The proposed project would include approximately 71,948 square feet of on-site landscaping. Lighting Exterior lighting would be limited to lighting on the exterior of the proposed homes and would meet Ordinance Code requirements. Utilities The proposed project would utilize existing utility connections from the following providers: •Electricity and Natural Gas: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) •Potable Water: East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) •Wastewater: Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District (Central San) •Solid Waste: Republic Services Stormwater A single landscaped bioretention basin facility would be located within the proposed project, consistent with C.3 stormwater requirements, located on Lot 10. Stormwater generated from the site would be cleaned and retained by the bioretention basins and then placed into a stormwater system. Cleaned and retained stormwater would be released into an existing 30- inch storm drain line within Walnut Boulevard. Water The proposed project would connect into an existing EBMUD domestic water line within Walnut Boulevard. Wastewater The proposed project would connect into an existing Central San 8-inch sewer line within Walnut Boulevard. Phasing and Construction For the purposes of this environmental analysis, the proposed project is assumed to be constructed in two phases beginning in the first quarter of 2023. Demolition of the existing single-family residence would occur within the first month of construction, followed by site preparation and grading activities. The proposed project is expected to be operational in the first quarter of 2024. 9.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is located in unincorporated Contra Costa County (County), California (Exhibit 1). As shown in Exhibit 2, the site is surrounded by the City of Walnut Creek, with the City of Lafayette to the west, the cities of Pleasant Hill and Concord to the north, unincorporated County to the south and Mount Diablo State Park to the east. The project site is located at 3180 Walnut Boulevard at the corner of Walnut Boulevard and View Lane (Exhibit 2). The approximately 2.88-acre project site corresponds to Accessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 180- 240-002. The project site is located within a residential area, and is surrounded by single-family homes. Walnut Heights Elementary School is located approximately 800 feet to the northeast. Interstate 680 (I-680) is located approximately 0.89 mile southwest of the site. The project site contains an existing vacant single-family residence with a detached garage, which would be demolished prior to project construction. The site was historically cultivated with an orchard since at least 1946. Orchard remnants, including mature and aging pecan, almond, and walnut trees, are distributed across the site. The site also contains native oaks, with the highest density of native oaks found along the south property line. A drainage swale parallels the entire north property line, terminating in a drainage inlet at the northwest corner of the site. The project site slopes down generally from northeast to southwest, ranging in elevation from approximately 232 feet above sea level (ASL) to approximately 192 feet ASL. 10.Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Contra Costa County Public Works Department, Contra Costa County Fire District, Contra Costa County Local Area Formation District (LAFCO), East Bay Municipal Utility District, and Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. 11.Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Notice of the proposed project was sent to Native American tribes, as applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1. and Government Code Section 65352.3. A Tribal Consultation List from the Native American Heritage Commission, dated June 21, 2022, was used to identify tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. No requests for consultation were received. Acronyms and Abbreviations ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS °C °F µg/m3 ACM ADU ARB ASL ASTM AUHSD BAAQMD BMP BRA CAL FIRE Cal/EPA Cal/OSHA CalEEMod CalRecycle Caltrans CBC CCCFPD CCCWP CCTA CDD CDFW Central San CEQA CERCLA CESA CFR CIP CNDDB CNPS CWMP CWP DBH DPR degrees Celsius (Centigrade) degrees Fahrenheit micrograms per cubic meter asbestos-containing material accessory dwelling unit California Air Resources Board Above Sea Level American Society for Testing and Materials Acalanes Union High School District Bay Area Air Quality Management District Best Management Practice Biological Resources Analysis California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection California Environmental Protection Agency California Division of Occupational Safety and Health California Emissions Estimator Model California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery California Department of Transportation California Building Standards Code Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Contra Costa Clean Water Program Contra Costa Transportation Authority Community Development Division California Department of Finance California Department of Fish and Wildlife Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District California Environmental Quality Act Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act California Environmental Species Act Code of Federal Regulations Capital Improvement Program California Natural Diversity Database California Native Plant Society Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan Contra Costa County Watershed Program diameter at breast height California Department of Parks and Recreation CDF 7 Acronyms and Abbreviations DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control du/acre dwelling unit per acre EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District EBP East Bay Plain EBRPD East Bay Regional Park District EIR Environmental Impact Report EOP Emergency Operations Plan EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zone FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GANDA Garcia and Associates GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency HAZNET Hazardous Waste Information System ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers LBP lead-based paint LRA Local Responsibility Area mgd million gallons per day MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program mph miles per hour MRP Municipal Regional Permit MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System NESHAP National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants NFHL National Flood Hazard Layer NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company PI Plasticity Index Qa Holocene alluvium R-20 Single-Family Residential RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SL Single-Family Residential-Low SRA State Responsibility Area SSMP Sewer System Management Plan State Water Board California State Water Resources Control Board SWF/LF solid waste facility/landfill SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan TCR Tribal Cultural Resource Acronyms and Abbreviations Tor Pliocene to late Miocene Orinda formation USDOT United States Department of Transportation USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VOC volatile organic compounds WCSD Walnut Creek School District WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan 9 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 with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Services Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance Environmental 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. 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact 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. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Dominique Vogelpohl, Project Planner Date Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development 06/21/2023 11 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 1.Aesthetics Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b)Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a State Scenic Highway? c)In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d)Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Environmental Evaluation Setting The project site is located in unincorporated Contra Costa County, California and is surrounded by the City of Walnut Creek, with the City of Lafayette to the west, the cities of Pleasant Hill and Concord to the north, unincorporated County to the south and Mount Diablo State Park to the east. Shell Ridge Open Space lies approximately 0.19 mile to the northeast. Diablo Foothills Regional Park, managed and maintained by the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), is approximately 2.12 miles east of the project site, between Shell Ridge Open Space and Mount Diablo State Park. The 1,060-acre regional park offers hiking, biking, equestrian trails and panoramic views of the San Francisco Bay Regional. Diablo Hills Regional Park is bounded by two notable landforms: the Castle Rocks of Mount Diablo and the “camel back” ridges that form Shell Ridge. These ridges connect the park to Mount Diablo State Park to the east and Shell Ridge Open Space to the west. Mount Diablo State Park and Shell Ridge Open Space together account for 22,500 acres of open space, one of the largest open space areas of the East Bay Area. Diablo Foothills Regional Park also contains the 15-acre Castle Rock Regional Recreation Area.1 Mount Diablo State Park, managed and maintained by the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), lies approximately 2.78 miles to the east of the project site. The more than 20,000- acre park offers hiking, biking, and equestrian trials as well as camping facilities. Mount Diablo’s summit has an elevation of 3,849 feet and offers views of the Farallon Islands to the west, the Sierra 1 East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD). 2022. Park Map. https://www.ebparks.org/sites/default/files/diablo_foothills_map.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. Nevada to the east, Mount Loma Prieta to the south, and Lassen Peak nearly 200 miles to the north.2 Mount Diablo is the most prominent topographical feature in the County. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) manages the State Scenic Highway Program. Existing law provides Caltrans with full possession and control of all State highways. The intent of the State Scenic Highway Program is to protect any freeway, highway, road, or other public right-of-way that traverses an area of exceptional scenic quality by regulating land use and development along scenic highways.3 The proposed project is not located within a State Scenic Highway corridor. The project site is located approximately 0.90 mile northeast of I-680 and approximately 1.63 miles east of I-24, both of which are officially designated State Scenic Highway.4 The General Plan defines scenic routes as those roads, streets, or freeways which traverse a scenic corridor of relatively high visual or cultural value. One such scenic route is North Gate Road, located approximately 2.66 miles east of the project site.5 Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than significant impact. No scenic resources, as defined by the General Plan, are located on the project site. As discussed above, there are several scenic resources in within 3 miles of the project site, many of which offer panoramic views of the San Francisco Bay Area. A significant impact would occur if development of the proposed project would have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The nearest scenic corridor identified by the General Plan is North Gate Road, approximately 2.66 miles to the east of the project site,6 Figure 9-1 of the Open Space Element of the County General Plan identifies major scenic ridges and scenic waterways in the County.7 According to this map, there are no designated scenic vista points in the area of the project site and therefore the project would not displace or obstruct views from a scenic vista. Furthermore, existing views of, and from the project site, would not be affected by the project because the proposed residential development would be built primarily at lower-lying elevations consistent with the existing surrounding residential neighborhood. b)Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a State Scenic Highway? No impact. As discussed above, the proposed project is not located within a State Scenic Highway. I- 680, south of the I-24 junction, is a designated State Scenic Highway and is located approximately 0.90 mile southwest of the project site. The next nearest designated State Scenic Highway is I-24, approximately 1.63 miles west of the project site. Because of topography and intervening 2 California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR). 2018. Mount Diablo State Park. Website: parks.ca.gov/pages/517/files/MountDiabloFinalWebLayout2018.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. 3 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2022. Scenic Highways. Website: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap- landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways. Accessed June 6, 2023. 4 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2019. State Scenic Highway Interactive Map. Website: https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. Accessed October 18, 2022. 5 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Transportation and Circulation Element, Figure 5-4 Scenic Routes Plan. 6 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Transportation and Circulation Element, Figure 5-4 Scenic Routes Plan. 7 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Open Space Element, Figure 9-1 Scenic Ridges and Waterways. 13 development, the site is not visible from these locations, thus precluding the potential for the project to substantially damage scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway. As such, no impact would occur. c)In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Less than significant impact. Degradation of visual character or quality requires substantial changes to the existing appearance of a site by constructing elements that are poorly designed or that would conflict with the existing surroundings. As previously discussed, both Diablo Foothills Regional Park and Mount Diablo State Park provide panoramic views of the surrounding areas. Existing development, such as existing homes and vegetation, obstruct or partially obstruct existing views from the project site to the foothills and ridgelines of Mount Diablo to the east. Additionally, the proposed project is not near a scenic corridor as identified by the General Plan. The proposed project would change the visual character of the site through the demolition of the existing single-family residence and the construction of 10 new single-family homes, as well as a new private roadway. However, the project site is located in a residentially developed area, with single- family homes surrounding the project site to the north, south, west, and east. Therefore, the proposed project would be compatible with the character of existing development in the immediate vicinity. The project site is located in an urbanized area and is surrounded by existing roads and residential development. The project site is designated as SL and zoned as R-20. Though the proposed project proposes alternate development standards from the R-20 zone , the proposed waivers of the existing development standards are allowed under the State Density Bonus Law, without a rezone or general plan amendment. The alternative development standards include front yard setbacks, side yard setbacks, and lot areas that would be smaller than the minimums outlined in the Ordinance Code. Furthermore, the proposed project would consist of the construction of single-family homes and therefore would be consistent with the nature and character of existing development in the vicinity and site’s designation of SL and zoning of R-20. Thus, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings as well as applicable zoning regulations. d)Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. Minimal glare would be introduced in the area. The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light-sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. The new sources of light associated with the proposed new 10 homes would illuminate the surrounding properties and Grayson Creek; thus, the project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light. Consequently, the applicant is required to implement the following mitigation measures to reduce impacts on nighttime views. Potential impact. The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light-sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. Project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties. Mitigation Measures MM AES-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Lighting Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: a.All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and streetlights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. b.Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. 15 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 2.Agriculture and Forestry 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 agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a)Convert Prime Farmland, Unique 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 nonagricultural use? b)Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract? c)Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d)Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e)Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Environmental Evaluation 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 Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) regarding the State’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Setting According to the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) California Important Farmland Finder, the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land.8 There are no designated agricultural lands or forested areas within the immediate project area. Would the project: a)Convert Prime Farmland, Unique 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 nonagricultural use? No impact. As stated above, the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. The project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, the proposed project would not convert such land to nonagricultural use and no impacts would occur. b)Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract? No impact. The project site is zoned as R-20 by the Zoning map, which is a Single-Family Residential designation. The site and surrounding area are not encumbered by a Williamson Act Contract. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract and no impacts would occur. c)Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? No impact. As stated previously, the project site is zoned as R-20 by the Zoning map, which is a Single-Family Residential designation. The project site is not zoned as forest land or timberland. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning or cause rezoning of forest land or timberland and no impacts would occur. d)Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No impact. According to the California Public Resources Code, “forest land” is land that can support 10 percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.9 The project site is zoned as R-20 and not zoned for forest use. This condition precludes the possibility of a conflict with a forest zoning designation. While there are existing trees on-site consisting of almond, valley oak, Monterey pine, coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), holly oak (Quercus ilex), California black walnut (Juglans hindsii), English walnut (Juglans regia), Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila), olive (Olea europea), plum (Prunus sp.), pecan (Carya illinoinensis), English hawthorn (Crataegus laevigatum), Peruvian pepper (Schinus molle), apricot, persimmon (Diospyros sp.), and privet (Ligustrum lucidum) species,10 8 Traverso Tree Service. 2021. Arborist Report for 3180 Walnut Boulevard. 9 Thomson Reuters Westlaw. 2019. California Code, Public Resources Code 12220. 10 Traverso Tree Service. 2021. Arborist Report for 3180 Walnut Boulevard. 17 the tree species do not constitute forest resources. The project site does not contain nor is adjacent to any forest land. As such, the proposed project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impacts would occur. e)Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No impact. As discussed throughout this section, the proposed project would not result in impacts to mapped farmland or forest land. The proposed project would not result in any other changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agriculture uses or the conversion of forest land to non-forest uses because neither agricultural nor forest land exist on the project site or in its vicinity. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures None required. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 3.Air Quality Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b)Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? c)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d)Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors or) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Environmental Evaluation Setting This section evaluates the potential effects on air quality that may result from implementation of the proposed project. This analysis is based on an Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases, and Energy Supporting Information Report completed by FirstCarbon Solutions for the proposed project in October 2022. Air pollutants relevant to the CEQA checklist questions for Air Quality are briefly described below. •Ozone is a gas that is formed when reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NO X )— both byproducts of internal combustion engine exhaust—undergo slow photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light wind, and warm temperature conditions are conducive to its formation. Health effects can include, but not be limited to irritated respiratory system, reduced lung function, and aggravated chronic lung diseases. •ROG, or volatile organic compounds (VOCs), are defined as any compound of carbon— excluding carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate—that participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions. Although there are slight differences in the definition of ROG and VOCs, the two terms are often used interchangeably. •Nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) forms quickly from NO X emissions. Health effects from NO 2 can include the following: potential to aggravate chronic respiratory disease and respiratory symptoms in sensitive groups; risk to public health implied by pulmonary and extra- pulmonary biochemical and cellular changes and pulmonary structural changes; contribution to atmospheric discoloration; increased visits to hospital for respiratory illnesses. 19 •CO is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of fuels. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during the winter morning, with little to no wind, when surface-based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal combustion engines—unlike ozone—and motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are a primary source of CO in the Sonoma County region, the highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near congested transportation corridors and intersections. Potential health effects from CO depends on exposure and can include slight headaches; nausea; aggravation of angina pectoris (chest pain) and other aspects of coronary heart disease; decreased exercise tolerance in persons with peripheral vascular disease and lung disease; impairment of central nervous system functions; possible increased risk to fetuses; death. •Respirable Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) and Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) consist of extremely small, suspended particles or droplets 10 microns and 2.5 microns or smaller in diameter. Some sources of particulate matter, like pollen and windstorms, are naturally occurring. However, in populated areas, most particulate matter is caused by road dust, diesel soot, combustion products, abrasion of tires and brakes, and construction activities. Health effects from short-term exposure (hours/days) can include the following: irrigation of the eyes, nose, throat; coughing; phlegm; chest tightness; shortness of breath; aggravate existing lung disease, causing asthma attacks and acute bronchitis; those with heart disease can suffer heart attacks and arrhythmias. Health effects from long-term exposure can include the following: reduced lung function; chronic bronchitis; changes in lung morphology; or death. •Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) refer to a diverse group of air pollutants that can affect human health, but have not had ambient air quality standards established for them. Diesel particulate matter (DPM) is a toxic air contaminant that is emitted from construction equipment and diesel fueled vehicles and trucks. Some short-term (acute) effects of DPM exposure include eye, nose, throat, and lung irritation, coughs, headaches, light-headedness, and nausea. Studies have linked elevated particle levels in the air to increased hospital admissions, emergency room visits, asthma attacks, and premature deaths among those suffering from respiratory problems. Human studies on the carcinogenicity of DPM demonstrate an increased risk of lung cancer, although the increased risk cannot be clearly attributed to diesel exhaust exposure. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. The proposed project is located in unincorporated Contra Costa County. It is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (Air Basin), where the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) regulates air quality. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for identifying nonattainment and attainment areas for each criteria pollutant within the Air Basin. The Air Basin is designated nonattainment for State standards for 1-hour and 8-hour ozone, 24-hour respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less (PM 10 ), annual PM 10 , and annual fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM 2.5 ).11 11 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act. Air Quality Guidelines. May. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed June 6, 2023. Would the project: a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The BAAQMD has adopted several air quality policies and plans to address regional air quality standards, the most recent of which is the 2017 Clean Air Plan. The 2017 Clean Air Plan was adopted in April of 2017 and serves as the regional Air Quality Plan (AQP) for the Air Basin for attaining National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan are to protect public health and protect the climate. The 2017 Clean Air Plan acknowledges that the BAAQMD’s two stated goals of protection are closely related. As such, the 2017 Clean Air Plan identifies a wide range of control measures intended to decrease both criteria pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The EPA has established NAAQS for six of some of the most common air pollutants—carbon monoxide, lead, ground level ozone, particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide—known as “criteria” air pollutants. GHGs are gaseous compounds in the atmosphere that are capable of absorbing infrared radiation, thereby trapping and holding heat in the atmosphere. By increasing the heat in the atmosphere, GHGs are responsible for the greenhouse effect, which ultimately leads to global warming. The 2017 Clean Air Plan also accounts for projections of population growth provided by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and identifies strategies to bring regional emissions into compliance with federal and State air quality standards. A project would be judged to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2017 Clean Air Plan if it would result in substantial new regional emissions not foreseen in the air quality planning process. The BAAQMD does not provide a numerical threshold of significance for project-level consistency analysis with AQPs. Therefore, the following criteria will be used for determining a project’s consistency with the AQP. •Criterion 1: Does the project support the primary goals of the AQP? •Criterion 2: Does the project include applicable control measures from the AQP? •Criterion 3: Does the project disrupt or hinder the implementation of any AQP control measures? Criterion 1 The primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan, the current AQP to date, are to: •Attain air quality standards. •Reduce population exposure to unhealthy air and protect public health in the Bay Area. •Reduce GHG emissions and protect the climate. A measure for determining whether the project supports the primary goals of the AQP is if the project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the air quality plans. This measure is determined by evaluating whether the proposed project was reasonably accounted for the in the AQP. 21 The County’s General Plan was updated in January 2005,12 which was prior to the BAAQMD’s adoption of the latest 2017 AQP. The project site is designated as Single-Family Residential-Low (SL) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is zoned as R-20 according to the Contra Costa County Zoning Map. The General Plan states the SL land use designation allows 1.0 to 2.9 single-family units per net acre; based on the site acreage of 2.88 gross acres, a maximum of 9 base units would be allowed.13 As described in Section 1.4.1–Density Bonus, the State Density Bonus Law requires cities and counties to grant a density bonus and other incentives or concessions to housing development projects in which any of the following are provided: •At least 5 percent of the housing units are restricted to very low income residents. •At least 10 percent of the housing units are restricted to lower income residents. •At least 10 percent of the housing units in a for-sale common interest development are restricted to moderate income residents. The proposed project would restrict the home on Lot 4 for moderate income residents, ensuring that at least 10 percent of the proposed housing units would be restricted to moderate income residents. As a result, consistent with State Government Code Section 65915(f)(4), the proposed project would be permitted a 7 percent increase in the allowed residential unit density, allowing for an additional unit on the project site.14 As the BAAQMD’s latest AQP utilizes growth projections from Plan Bay Area 2040, which relies on growth projections and land use patterns from local general plans and was adopted after the adoption of the City’s General Plan, development of the project site has been reasonably accounted for in the BAAQMD’s latest AQP. Furthermore, as discussed in Impact 2.3(b), implementation of the proposed project would not exceed the BAAQMD operational or construction thresholds for criteria pollutants on an average daily or annual basis. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the first criterion. Criterion 2 The 2017 Clean Air Plan contains control measures to reduce air pollutants and GHGs at the local, regional, and global levels. Along with the traditional stationary, area, mobile source, and transportation control measures, the 2017 Clean Air Plan contains many control measures designed to protect the climate and promote mixed use, compact development to reduce vehicle emissions and exposure to pollutants from stationary mobile sources. The 2017 Clean Air Plan also includes an account of the implementation status of control measures identified in the prior 2010 Clean Air Plan. 12 Contra Costa County. 2005. Department of Conservation and Development. General Plan 2020. Website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/4732/General-Plan. Accessed June 6, 2023. 13 Contra Costa County. 2005. Land use Element (reprint 2010). Website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-Element?bidId=. Accessed June 6, 2023. 14 9 (d/u) X (0.07) = 0.63 d/u; fractional unit rounded to 1 d/u The table below lists the Clean Air Plan policies relevant to the proposed project and evaluates the consistency with the policies. As shown below, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable measures. Project Consistency with Applicable Clean Air Plan Control Measures Control Measure Project Consistency Buildings Control Measures BL1: Green Buildings Consistent. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure. The proposed project would comply with the latest energy efficiency standards and incorporate applicable energy efficiency features designed to reduce project energy consumption. BL4: Urban Heat Island Mitigation Consistent. The proposed project would include a landscaped and irrigated bioretention basin area, which would serve to reduce stormwater runoff. The proposed project has also been designed to maximize the existing trees on-site which would also reduce the urban heat island effect. Energy Control Measures EN1: Decarbonize Electricity Generation Consistent. The project applicant would, at a minimum, be required to conform to the energy efficiency requirements of the California Building Standards Code, also known as Title 24. For example, the proposed project would install rooftop solar photovoltaic systems (PV) capable of generating renewable electricity as well as low-flow plumbing fixtures and irrigation heads compliant with Title 24 Standards. Furthermore, the proposed project would include high-efficiency indoor and outdoor lighting. These project design features would decrease electricity demand compared to standard building construction. EN2: Decrease Electricity Demand Natural and Working Lands Control Measures NW2: Urban Tree Planting Consistent. Stormwater generated from the site would be cleaned and retained by the bioretention basin and then discharged into the stormwater system. The basin would be landscaped to provide an attractive feature visible within the project and from Walnut Boulevard. The project has been designed to maximize the existing trees on-site. In total, 29 of the 74 existing trees would be retained and would be protected during construction. WA3: Green Waste Diversion Consistent. The waste service provider for the proposed project would be required to meet the Assembly Bill 341 (AB 341) and Senate Bills 939 (SB 939) and SB 1374 requirements that require waste service providers to divert green waste. In addition, AB 1383 went into effect on January 1, 2022, which 23 Control Measure Project Consistency aims to reduce organic waste disposal by 75 percent by 2025 and to secure 20 percent of surplus edible food for the food insecure by 2025. Republic Services provides green waste service for Contra Costa County and would provide all new residents with green waste bins. All vegetation refuse generated during operation of the proposed project would be disposed of off-site. WA4: Recycling and Waste Reduction Consistent. The waste service provider for the proposed project would be required to meet the AB 341, SB 939 and SB 1374 requirements that require recyclable waste to be recycled and remove 75 percent from the landfill waste stream by 2020. The proposed would connect into an existing Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San) 8” sewer line within Walnut Boulevard. Stationary Control Measures SS36: Particulate Matter from Trackout Consistent with mitigation. BAAQMD’s recommended mitigation measures for construction fugitive dust control would be incorporated into Mitigation Measure (MM) AIR-1 and implemented to reduce fugitive dust and trackout during project construction. In addition, mud and dirt that may be tracked out onto the nearby public roads during construction activities shall be removed promptly by the contractor based on BAAQMD’s requirements. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with this measure after implementation of MM AIR-1. SS37: Particulate Matter from Asphalt Operations Consistent. Asphalt used during the construction of the proposed project would be subject to BAAQMD Regulation 8, Rule 15-Emulsified and Liquid Asphalts. Although this rule does not directly apply to the proposed project, it does limit the reactive organic gas (ROG) content of asphalt available for use during construction through regulating the sale and use of asphalt. By using asphalt from facilities that meet BAAQMD regulations, the proposed project would be consistent with this Clean Air Plan measure. Control Measure Project Consistency Transportation Control Measures TR9: Bicycle and Pedestrian Access and Facilities Consistent. The proposed project would incorporate a 5-foot sidewalk along the southeast section of the new proposed roadway off and along the righthand side of Walnut Boulevard. Sidewalk currently exists along the majority of Walnut Boulevard. Walnut Boulevard currently supports Class III Bicycle facilities on each frontage of the roadway. One Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) bus stop (Walnut Boulevard and Fraser Drive) serving Bus Line 602 is 400 feet east of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would incorporate bicycle and pedestrian access in the project design and would be in close proximity to public transit. The proposed project would not conflict with the BAAQMD’s efforts to encourage the uses of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as transit services. Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air-plan/attachment-a_-proposed- final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed June 6, 2023. In summary, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable measures under the 2017 Clean Air Plan after the implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) AIR-1; therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Criterion 2 after incorporation of mitigation. Criterion 3 The proposed project would constitute the development and operation of 10 single-family homes. The proposed project would be consistent with applicable control measures such as supporting transit, pedestrian, or bicycle facilities. In addition, the proposed project would comply with energy efficiency standards contained in the California Building Code and maintaining landscaping across the project site. Considering this information, the proposed project would not disrupt or hinder implementation of any AQP control measures. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Criterion 3. Summary As addressed above, the proposed project would be consistent with all three criteria after the incorporation of MM AIR-1 and the proposed project would not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan. Therefore, impacts associated with conflicting with or obstructing implementation of the 2017 Clean Air Plan would be less than significant with mitigation. b)Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. This impact is related to the cumulative effect of a project’s regional criteria pollutant emissions. By its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact resulting from emissions generated over a large geographic region. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within the Air Basin, and this 25 regional impact is a cumulative impact. Therefore, new development projects (such as the proposed project) within the Air Basin would contribute to this impact only on a cumulative basis. No single project would be sufficient in size by itself to result in nonattainment of regional air quality standards. Instead, a project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when evaluated in combination with past, present, and future development projects. Potential localized and regional impacts would result in exceedances of State or federal standards for nitrogen oxide (NO X ), particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ), or carbon monoxide (CO). NO X emissions are of concern because of potential health impacts from exposure to NO X emissions during construction and operation and as a precursor in the formation of airborne ozone. PM 10 and PM 2.5 are of particular concern during construction because of the potential to emit exhaust emissions from the operation of off-road construction equipment and fugitive dust during earth-disturbing activities (construction fugitive dust). CO emissions are of particular concern during project operation because operational CO hotspots are related to increases in on-road vehicle congestion. ROG emissions are also important because of their participation in the formation of ground level ozone. Ozone is a respiratory irritant and an oxidant that increases susceptibility to respiratory infections and can cause substantial damage to vegetation and other materials. Elevated ozone concentrations result in reduced lung function, particularly during vigorous physical activity. This health problem is particularly acute in sensitive receptors such as the sick, elderly, and young children. The cumulative analysis focuses on whether a specific project would result in cumulatively considerable emissions. According to Section 15064(h)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines, the existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone does not constitute substantial evidence that the project’s incremental effects would be cumulatively considerable. Rather, the determination of cumulative air quality impacts for construction and operational emissions is based on whether the project would result in regional emissions that exceed the BAAQMD regional thresholds of significance for construction and operations on a project level. The thresholds of significance represent the allowable amount of emissions each project can generate without generating a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air quality impacts. Therefore, a project that would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance on the project level also would not be considered to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to these regional air quality impacts. Construction and operational emissions are discussed separately below. Construction Emissions Construction Fugitive Dust As previously mentioned, fugitive dust (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) would be generated during earthmoving activities but would largely remain localized near the project site. The BAAQMD does not recommend a numerical threshold for fugitive dust particulate matter emissions. Instead, the BAAQMD bases the determination of significance for fugitive dust on considering the control measures to be implemented. If all appropriate emissions control measures are implemented as recommended by the BAAQMD, then fugitive dust emissions during construction are not considered significant. These measures may include, but are not limited to, watering or seeding disturbed areas, covering stockpiles of dirt or aggregate, or other soil stabilization practices. In addition, the BAAQMD recommends that a series of mitigation measures be implemented for all construction projects, which includes various dust control measures, such as watering disturbed areas daily and reducing vehicle speeds on unpaved roads. As such, the construction mitigation measures recommended by the BAAQMD are included herein as MM AIR-1 to ensure that adequate dust control measures are implemented at the project site. With the incorporation of MM AIR-1, short-term construction impacts associated with violating an air quality standard or contributing substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation would be less than significant for fugitive dust. Construction Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, was used to estimate the proposed project’s construction emissions. CalEEMod provides a consistent platform for estimating construction and operational emissions from a wide variety of land use projects and is the model recommended by the BAAQMD for estimating project emissions. Estimated construction emissions are compared with the applicable thresholds of significance established by the BAAQMD to assess ROG, NO X , exhaust PM 10 , and exhaust PM 2.5 construction emissions to determine significance for this criterion. For purposes of this analysis, construction of the proposed project is expected to start in the first quarter of 2023 and conclude in the first quarter of 2024. If the construction schedule is moved to later years, construction emissions would likely decrease because of improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements that would affect future construction equipment. The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represent a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required by CEQA Guidelines, and provides a conservative analysis of expected emissions. As shown in the table below, the proposed project would be constructed in 269 net workdays. For a more detailed description of the construction parameters used in estimating air pollutant emissions modeling.15 Preliminary Construction Schedule Construction Activity Start Date End Date Working Days per Week Total Number of Working Days Demolition 3/1/2023 3/28/2023 5 20 Site Preparation 3/29/2023 3/31/2023 5 3 Grading 4/1/2023 4/10/2023 5 6 Building Construction 4/11/2023 2/12/2024 5 220 Paving 2/13/2024 2/26/2024 5 10 Architectural Coating 2/27/2024 3/11/2024 5 10 15 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 27 Construction Activity Start Date End Date Working Days per Week Total Number of Working Days Source: CalEEMod Output Files, FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. The calculations of pollutant emissions from the construction equipment account for the type of equipment, horsepower, and load factors of the equipment, along with the duration of use.16 The table below presents the average daily construction emissions compared with the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds. Construction Emissions Construction Activity Air Pollutants1 (tons/year) ROG NO X PM 10 (Exhaust) PM 2.5 (Exhaust) Demolition 0.02 0.15 0.01 0.01 Site Preparation 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 Grading 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 Building Construction 2023 0.17 1.36 0.06 0.06 Building Construction 2024 0.03 0.21 0.01 0.01 Paving 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 Architectural Coating 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 Total Emissions (tons) 0.28 1.83 0.08 0.08 Daily Average Total Emissions (lbs) 562.76 3,660.40 157.40 150.20 Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day)2 2.09 13.61 0.59 0.56 Significance Threshold (lbs/day) 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Notes: 1 Totals may not add up due to rounding. Calculations use unrounded totals. 2 Calculated by dividing the total lbs of emissions by the total number of nonoverlapping working days of construction (269 workdays). lbs = pounds NO X = oxides of nitrogen PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases Source: CalEEMod Output, FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 16 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. As shown in Table Construction Emissions, the construction emissions from all construction activities are below the recommended thresholds of significance. Therefore, project construction would have less than significant impact related to emissions of ROG, NO X , exhaust PM 10 , and exhaust PM 2.5 . As previously discussed, the proposed project would implement MM AIR-1 for dust control to reduce potential impacts related to fugitive dust emissions during project construction. Therefore, project construction would have a less than significant impact with mitigation. Operational Emissions Operational Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 Operational emissions would include area, energy, and mobile sources. Area sources include emissions from architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscape equipment, while energy sources include emissions from the combustion of natural gas for water and space heating. The proposed project would be designed all-electric; however, natural gas use is included in CalEEMod model as a default option and provides a conservative estimate of emissions. Mobile sources include exhaust and road dust emissions from the vehicles that would travel to and from the project site. Pollutants of concern include ROG, NO X, PM 10 , and PM 2.5 . Project operations were analyzed starting in 2024, the first calendar year of potential operation. The major sources for proposed operational emissions of ROG, NO X , PM 10 , and PM 2.5 include motor vehicle traffic, landscaping, and the occasional repainting of buildings. The average daily and annual emissions are presented in the table below. Operational emissions of the respective pollutants were calculated using CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0.17 Operational Emissions (Unmitigated) Emissions Source Criteria Pollutants ROG NO X PM 10 (Total) PM 2.5 (Total) Annual Emissions Summary (tons/year) Area 0.18 <0.01 0.01 0.01 Energy 0.00 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 Mobile (Motor Vehicles) 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.02 Total Project Emissions 0.22 0.06 0.09 0.04 Thresholds of Significance 10 10 15 10 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No Average Daily Emissions Summary (lbs/day) Project Emissions (lbs/year) 450 128 189 72 Average Daily Project Emissions (lbs/day)1 1.23 0.35 0.52 0.20 Thresholds of Significance 54 54 82 54 Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No 17 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 29 Emissions Source Criteria Pollutants ROG NO X PM 10 (Total) PM 2.5 (Total) Notes: NO X = nitrogen oxide PM 10 = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter PM 2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases 1 For average daily emissions, the proposed project is assumed to operate 365 days per year. Therefore, the annual tonnage of emissions is multiplied by 2,000 pounds per ton to identify total pounds of emissions and divided by 365 days per year to identify average daily emissions. Source: CalEEMod Output, FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. As shown in Table Operational Emissions, the proposed project would not exceed the BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance during operation, indicating that ongoing project operations would not be considered to have the potential to generate a significant quantity of air pollutants. Therefore, long- term operational impacts associated with criteria pollutant emissions generated by the proposed project would be less than significant. Operational Carbon Monoxide Hotspot The CO emissions from traffic generated by the proposed project could be a concern at the local level. Congested intersections can result in the potential for high, localized concentrations of CO, known as a CO hotspot. The BAAQMD recommends a screening analysis to determine whether a project has the potential to contribute to a CO hotspot. The screening criteria identify when site-specific CO dispersion modeling is necessary. The proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to air quality for local CO if all the following screening criteria are met: 1.The project is consistent with an applicable Congestion Management Program established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans; and 2.The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and 3.The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway). Consistency With an Applicable Congestion Management Program Per the County of Contra Costa Transportation Analysis Guidelines,18 projects of 20 residential units or less would be expected to have less than significant VMT impacts. As a result, since the proposed project would develop 10 residential units, the proposed project would be below the screening 18 Contra Costa County Conservation and Development Department. Public Works Department 2020. Contra Costa County Transportation Analysis Guidelines. VMT Screening Criteria 2020. threshold. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the County guidelines and the applicable congestion management agency. Increase Traffic Volumes at Affected Intersections to More Than 44,000 Vehicles Per Hour As described previously, the proposed project would not exceed the County Transportation Analysis Guidelines threshold and as such, no transportation impact analysis was required for the proposed project, and the project would be expected to result in less than significant impacts related to VMT. Thus, the proposed project’s anticipated trip generation would not be expected to result in a significant increase in traffic volumes on nearby intersections. Therefore, the addition of proposed project traffic volumes would not result in nearby intersections experiencing traffic volumes of 44,000 or more vehicles per hour. Increase Traffic Volumes at Affected Intersections Where Vertical and/or Horizontal Mixing Is Substantially Limited CO hotspots can still occur when a transportation facility’s design or orientation prevents the adequate dispersion of CO emissions from vehicles, resulting in the accumulation of local CO concentrations. The design or orientation of a transportation facility that may prevent the dispersion of CO emissions include tunnels, parking garages, bridge underpasses, natural or urban canyons, below-grade roadways, or other features where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. However, adjacent roadways that would receive new vehicle trips generated by the proposed project do not include transportation facilities where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. Walnut Boulevard would receive vehicle trips generated by the proposed project and is an open surface roadway with none of the design features discussed above that could prevent atmospheric mixing. In summary, the proposed project is consistent with the local Congestion Management Program. Therefore, based on the above criteria, the proposed project would not exceed the CO screening criteria and would have a less than significant impact related to CO. Summary Impacts related to a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant would be less than significant. With the incorporation of MM AIR-1, short-term construction impacts associated with violating an air quality standard or contributing substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation would be less than significant with mitigation for fugitive dust. Emissions from all construction and operational activities are below the recommended thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant impact related to cumulative emissions of ROG, NO X , exhaust PM 10 , and exhaust PM 2.5 . In addition, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to CO. Therefore, this impact is less than significant with incorporation of MM AIR-1. c)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. The BAAQMD defines a sensitive receptor as the following: “Facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples include schools, hospitals, and residential areas.” As specified by the BAAQMD, 31 health risk and hazard impacts should be analyzed for sensitive receptors within a 1,000-foot radius of the project site.19 The closest existing sensitive receptors in each direction include the following: •Single-family residences immediately adjacent to the project site’s north, east, south, and west property boundary. The following four criteria were applied to determine the significance of project emissions to sensitive receptors. The proposed project is considered to have a potentially significant impact if: •Criterion 1: Construction of the project would result in an exceedance of the health risk significance thresholds. •Criterion 2: The cumulative health impact would result in an exceedance of the cumulative health risk significance thresholds. •Criterion 3: Operation of the project would result in an exceedance of the health risk significance thresholds. •Criterion 4: A CO hotspot assessment demonstrates that the project would result in the development of a CO hotspot that could cause an exceedance of the CO ambient air quality standards. Criterion 1: Project Construction Toxic Air Pollutants An assessment was made of the potential health impacts to surrounding sensitive receptors resulting from TAC emissions during construction. A summary of the assessment is provided below.20 DPM has been identified by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) as a carcinogenic substance. Major sources of DPM include off-road construction equipment and heavy-duty delivery truck and worker activities. For purposes of this analysis, DPM is represented as exhaust emissions of PM 2.5 . Estimation of Construction DPM Emissions Construction DPM emissions (represented as emission of exhaust PM 2.5 ) were estimated using CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, as described under the discussion for Impact 2.3(b). As presented in Table Preliminary Construction Schedule, the proposed project's construction is anticipated to occur from the first quarter of 2023 through the first quarter of 2024. Construction emissions were calculated for each construction activity, as displayed in Table Construction Emissions. On-site and off-site emissions generated during project construction were modeled with a working schedule of 8 hours per day, 5 days per week. Emissions were adjusted by a factor of 4.2 to convert for use with a 24-hour-per-day, 365 day-per-year averaging period.21 Based on the analysis presented in this section, emissions were estimated for unmitigated project construction and a mitigated scenario that included cleaner construction equipment. Equipment 19 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed June 6, 2023. 20 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 21 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. tiers refer to a generation of emission standards established by the EPA and ARB that apply to diesel engines in off-road equipment. The “tier” of an engine depends on the model year and horsepower rating; generally, the newer a piece of equipment is, the greater the tier it is likely to have. Excluding engines greater than 750 horsepower, Tier 1 engines were manufactured generally between 1996 and 2003. Tier 2 engines were manufactured between 2001 and 2007. Tier 3 engines were manufactured between 2006 and 2011. Tier 4 engines are the newest and some incorporate hybrid electric technology. The table below summarizes the emission rates of unmitigated and mitigated DPM during construction of the proposed project, as analyzed for construction of the entire project. Project DPM Construction Emissions Scenario On-site DPM—Area (tons/year) Off-site DPM—Road Segments (tons/year)1 Total Local DPM Emissions (tons/year) Unmitigated Project Construction DPM 0.07447 0.00063 0.0751 Mitigated Project Construction DPM 0.00463 0.00063 0.00526 Notes: DPM = diesel particulate matter 1 In AERMOD and HARP2 model, the off-site emissions are adjusted to represent construction vehicle travel routes from within approximately 1,000 feet of the project site. Off-site emissions shown here do not reflect the 1,000-foot adjustment. Source: CalEEMod Output and Construction Health Risk Assessment Calculations, FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. Estimation of Cancer Risks and Hazards The BAAQMD has developed a set of guidelines for estimating cancer risks that provide adjustment factors that emphasize the increased sensitivities and susceptibility of young children to exposures to TACs.22,23 These adjustment factors include age-sensitivity weighting factors, age-specific daily breathing rates, and age-specific time-at-home factors. As previously discussed, the Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor (MIR) would be at a single-family residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the west. The following equations are drawn from the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) HRA guidelines and were adjusted with values identified for adjustment in the BAAQMD guidelines. Cancer Risk = CPF x DOSE AIR x ASP x ED/AT x FAH (EQ -1) Where: Cancer Risk = Total individual excess cancer risk defined as the cancer risk a hypothetical individual faces if exposed to carcinogenic emissions from a particular source for specified 22 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2016. BAAQMD Air Toxics NSR Program Health Risk Assessment Guidelines. December. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/permit- modeling/hra_guidelines_12_7_2016_clean-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed June 6, 2023. 23 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2020. BAAQMD Health Risk Assessment Modeling Protocol. December. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/ab617-community-health/facility-risk- reduction/documents/baaqmd_hra_modeling_protocol_august_2020-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed June 6, 2023. 33 exposure durations; this risk is defined as an excess risk because it is above and beyond the background cancer risk to the population; cancer risk is expressed in terms of risk per million exposed individuals. CPF = Inhalation Cancer Potency Factor (1.1 for DPM) ASP = Age Sensitivity Factor (see table below) ED = Exposure Duration (duration of construction activity) AT = Averaging Time for lifetime cancer risk (70 years expressed in days) FAH = Fraction of time At Home (see table below) DOSE AIR = C AIR x DBR x A x EF (EQ -2) Where: C AIR = TAC concentration from air dispersion model (µg/m3) DBR = Daily Breathing Rate (see table below) A = Inhalation Absorption factor (1) EF = Exposure Frequency (see table below) The BAAQMD- and OEHHB-recommended values for the various cancer risk parameters, shown in EQ-1 and EQ-2, are provided in the table below. Exposure Assumptions for Cancer Risk Calculations Receptor Type Duration During Construction (Years) Fraction of Time at Home (FAH) Exposure Frequency (EF) (Days/Year) Age Sensitivity Factors (ASF) Daily Breathing Rate (DBR) (L/kg-day) Residences1 Third Trimester 0.25 1 350 10 361 0 to <2 Years 1.1 1 350 10 1,090 Notes: (L/kg-day) = liters per kilogram body weight per day. 1 The daily breathing rates for residential receptors assume the 95th percentile breathing rates for all individuals. BAAQMD assumes residential receptors exposure occurs 24 hours per day for 350 days per year. All sensitive receptors were modeled as residential receptors, which presents a conservative estimate of health impacts for nonresidential sensitive receptor land uses. Sources: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2016. BAAQMD Air Toxics NSR Program Health Risk Assessment Guidelines. December. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. February. FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. Estimation of Non-Cancer Chronic Hazards TACs can also cause chronic (long-term) effects related to non-cancer illnesses such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental effects. Non-cancer health risks are conveyed in terms of the hazard index (HI), a ratio of the predicted concentration of the facility’s reported TAC emissions to a concentration considered acceptable to public health professionals. A significant risk is defined as an HI of 1 or greater. An HI of less than 1 indicates that no significant health risks are expected from the facility’s TAC emissions. The relationship for the non-cancer hazards of TACs is given by the following equation: HI = C ann /REL Where: HI = Hazard Index: an expression of the potential for chronic non-cancer health risks C ann = Annual average TAC concentration (µg/m3) REL = Reference Exposure Level: the DPM concentration at which no adverse health effects are anticipated Annual concentrations of DPM as predicted by the air dispersion model are used to estimate chronic non-cancer hazards. The OEHHA has defined a REL for DPM of 5 µg/m3. Estimation of Health Risks and Hazards from Project Construction To assess impacts to off-site sensitive receptors, receptor locations within the American Meteorological Society/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD) were placed at locations of existing residences and schools located in the vicinity of the project boundary. As previously discussed, project construction is anticipated to start in the first quarter of 2023 and conclude in the first quarter of 2024. The following AERMOD modeling parameters were utilized to identify the DPM concentration at identified receptors. Sensitive receptors (e.g., schools, daycare facilities, hospitals, care facilities, residences) within approximately 1,000 feet of the project boundary were represented in the model with discrete Cartesian receptors at a flagpole height of ground level for conservative estimate. For schools and parks, a boundary of discrete receptors was placed around the perimeter of that land use to identify potential impacts at the closest point to the project site. The sensitive receptors to the project site represented in the air dispersion modeling include the following: •Receptor types identified within approximately 1,000 feet of the project boundary included residential, school, and park receptors. - The closest sensitive receptors are single-family residences immediately adjacent to the project site boundary to the north, east, south, and west. - Walnut Heights Elementary School is approximately 700 feet east of the project site. - A public park is approximately 600 feet southwest of the project site Emissions were characterized in the model using area and line volume sources to represent different activities. The following describes the emission sources as represented in AERMOD: •On-site construction activities are represented with one polygon area source across the entire project site. •Off-site construction hauling and vendor truck operation for project construction were represented with line volume sources on Walnut Boulevard. Off-site emissions were adjusted 35 to account for off-site emissions that would occur within 1,000 feet of the project site (see Off-Site PM 2.5 Exhaust Adjustment Sheet24). Other AERMOD inputs are described below: •AERMOD’s default regulatory dispersion option was selected. One-hour and annual average options were chosen for pollutant PM 2.5 (DPM was represented as exhaust PM 2.5 ). •The Urban dispersion coefficient was used as greater than 50 percent of the surrounding three kilometers is developed. For Urban Groups option under Source Pathway, Walnut Creek City and population of 69,695 was used. For Variable Emissions option under Source Pathway, variable factor 4.2 was applied for 8 hours a day on weekdays (all other hours and weekends had variable factor of zero) to reflect that annual emissions are adjusted on weekdays for conservative estimate. •Meteorological data from the Livermore Municipal Airport Air Monitoring Station was used for lower atmospheric meteorological data. This station was selected as it resembles physical site characteristics and elevation generally representative of the project site. The Oakland Airport Air Monitoring Station provides preprocessed meteorological data for upper atmospheric conditions in the region. Both monitoring stations cover the years 2012-2017. The model used all years of available meteorological data. To facilitate a standard calculation platform, ARB has developed the Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program (HARP2) software to identify the health risks associated with various TACs.25 In this analysis, HARP2 was utilized to estimate the health risks associated with DPM generated during construction activities. Since the project construction lasts 13 months, exposure duration was set to be 1.1 years. The MIR during project construction were found at a residence immediately adjacent to the project site to the west. The table below presents a summary of the proposed project’s construction cancer risk, chronic non-cancer hazard, and annual PM 2.5 concentration impacts at each MIR. For informational purposes, the table below also presents risks and hazards associated with the maximum impacted school, daycare, and community center. As discussed in Impact 2.3(b), MM AIR- 1 would be required to reduce fugitive dust emissions during construction. It should be noted that inclusion of MM AIR-1 only reduces PM 2.5 fugitive dust and not PM 2.5 exhaust. Estimated Health Risks and Hazards During Project Construction–Unmitigated Impact Scenario Cancer Risk (risk per million) Chronic Non-Cancer Hazard Index4 Annual PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Residential MIR (Off-Site)1 76.7 0.079 0.395 Park MIR2 5.7 <0.01 0.029 School MIR3 3.3 <0.01 0.017 BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance 10 1 0.3 24 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 25 California Air Resources Board (ARB). HARP Air Dispersion Modeling and Risk Tool. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/harp-air-dispersion-modeling-and-risk-tool. Accessed June 6, 2023. Exceeds Individual Source Threshold? Yes No Yes Notes: MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor 1 The Off-Site Residential MIR represents a residence immediately to the west of the project site (located at 37°53'43.7"N 122°02'34.6"W). 2 The Park MIR represents the Lar Rieu Park which is approximately 600 feet southwest of the project site. 3 The School MIR represents Walnut Heights Elementary School which is approximately 700 feet east of the project site 4 Chronic non-cancer hazard index was estimated by dividing the annual DPM concentration (as PM 2.5 exhaust) by the REL of 5 µg/m3. Source: FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. As shown in the table below, PM 2.5 exhaust emissions generated during unmitigated project construction would result in an incremental cancer risk of approximately 77 individuals per one million for the single-family home immediately to the west of the project site, which exceeds the BAAQMD’s significance threshold of 10 individuals per one million. Therefore, the proposed project would be required to implement MM AIR-2, which would require the use of Tier 4 Final engines for all construction equipment equal to or greater than 25 horsepower. With the implementation of MM AIR-2, project construction would result in an approximately 94 percent reduction in on-site PM 2.5 exhaust emissions. As shown in Table Project DPM Construction Emissions, the implementation of MM AIR-2 would ensure that construction DPM emissions would not exceed BAAQMD cancer risk nor annual PM 2.5 concentration. As such, this impact would be less than significant with implementation of MM AIR-2. Estimated Health Risks and Hazards During Project Construction—Mitigated Impact Scenario Cancer Risk (risk per million) Chronic Non-Cancer Hazard Index4 Annual PM 2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Residential MIR (Off-Site)1 4.8 0.005 0.0246 Park MIR2 0.7 <0.01 0.0038 School MIR3 0.2 <0.01 0.0011 BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance 10 1 0.3 Exceeds Individual Source Threshold? No No No Notes: MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor 1 The Off-Site Residential MIR represents a residence immediately to the west of the project site (located at 37°53'43.7"N 122°02'34.6"W). 2 The Park MIR represents the Lar Rieu Park which is approximately 600 feet southwest of the project site. 3 The School MIR represents Walnut Heights Elementary School which is approximately 700 feet east of the project site 4 Chronic non-cancer hazard index was estimated by dividing the annual DPM concentration (as PM 2.5 exhaust) by the REL of 5 µg/m3. Source: FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. The mitigated construction emissions would not cause any exceedance of BAAQMD health risk threshold after incorporating MM AIR-2. Therefore, project construction would not result in 37 significant health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors with incorporation of the identified mitigation. Criterion 2: Cumulative Health Risk Assessment The BAAQMD recommends assessing the potential cumulative impacts from sources of TACs within 1,000 feet of a project. For a project-level analysis, BAAQMD provides several tools for use in screening potential sources of TACs. The BAAQMD-provided tools used to assess the potential cumulative impacts from TACs are described below: •Health Risks for Local Roadways. The BAAQMD pre-calculated concentrations and the associated potential cancer risks and PM2.5 concentration increases for each county within their jurisdiction for roadways that carry at least 30,000 average daily trips. For Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) Program areas, the BAAQMD also includes local roadways that meet BAAQMD’s “major roadway” criteria of 10,000 vehicles or 1,000 trucks per day. The latest available screening tool is in the form of a Geographic Information System (GIS) raster file. The proposed project is located in an 8 Hour Ozone Exceedance CARE area,26 which means 8-hour ozone levels in this area exceeded the federal standard (75 ppb) three or more times during three recent summers (2011-2013). To ensure a conservative estimate, traffic volume on Walnut Boulevard was obtained from the Walnut Boulevard Traffic Calming Study published in 2019.27 Daily traffic volume of 4,000 was assumed based on this information, and the cancer risk and PM2.5 concentrations were adjusted with BAAQMD’s Roadway Screening Calculator; those results are included in Table Exposure Assumptions for Cancer Risk Calculations. •Freeway Screening Analysis Tool. The BAAQMD prepared a GIS tool that contains pre- estimated cancer risk and PM2.5 concentration increases for highways within the Bay Area. The nearest freeways to the proposed project include I-680, approximately 1 mile west of the project site. However, the raster file provides data at all points in the Air Basin. •Stationary Source Risk and Hazard Screening Tools. The BAAQMD prepared a GIS tool with the location of permitted sources and provides a health risk calculator that estimates and refines screen-level cancer risk, a non-cancer health hazard index, and PM2.5 concentrations using emissions data from BAAQMD's permitting database.28 For each emissions source, the BAAQMD provides conservative estimates of cancer risk and PM2.5 concentrations. Based on information from the GIS tool, there are no BAAQMD-permitted stationary sources within 1,000 feet of the project site. •Rail Screening Tools. The BAAQMD prepared GIS tools that contain estimated cancer risks and PM2.5 concentrations from railroad operations at any point within the Air Basin. No existing railways are within 1,000 feet of the project site. Similar to the other BAAQMD-prepared raster files, the rail tool provides data at all points in the Air Basin. 26 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2014. Community Air Risk Evaluation Program. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/community-health/community-health-protection-program/community-air-risk-evaluation-care-program. Accessed June 6, 2023. 27 FEHR & PEERS. 2019. Draft Technical Memorandum, Walnut Boulevard Traffic Calming Study. 28 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Permitted Stationary Sources Risk and Hazards. Permitted Stationary Sources Risk and Hazards. Website: https://baaqmd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2387ae674013413f987b1071715daa65. Accessed June 6, 2023. Cumulative Health Risk Assessment at the Maximum Impacted Sensitive Receptor A cumulative Health Risk Assessment was performed that examined the cumulative impacts of the proposed project’s construction emissions and sources of TAC emissions within 1,000 feet of the project site. The cumulative health risk results, including health risks from the nearby roadway sources, are summarized during project construction in the table below. Cumulative health risk results shown therein are representative of the health risks to the MIR identified in the construction HRA that would experience the highest concentration of pollutants. Summary of the Cumulative Health Impacts at the MIR during Construction Source/Impact Scenario Source Type Distance from MIR1 (feet) Cancer Risk (per million) Chronic HI PM2.5 Concentration (mg/m3) Project MIR Project Construction (Unmitigated) Diesel Construction Equipment 22 76.7 0.079 0.395 Project Construction (Mitigated) Diesel Construction Equipment 22 4.8 0.005 0.025 Roadways Walnut Boulevard 113 1.58 ND 0.03 Air Basin Major Roadways — 1.4 ND 0.026 Rail Air Basin Railways — 0.3 ND <0.001 Freeways Air Basin Freeways/Highways — 13.0 ND 0.237 Cumulative Health Risks Cumulative Maximum with Project DPM Emissions (Unmitigated) 93.0 0.079 0.688 Cumulative Maximum with Project DPM Emissions (Mitigated) 21.1 0.005 0.318 BAAQMD’s Cumulative Thresholds of Significance 100 10 0.8 Threshold Exceeded in Any Scenario? No No No Notes: HI = Hazard Index MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor ND = no data available µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter 1 The MIR above represents the greatest impacted MIR, which is the residence immediately to the west of the project site (located at 37°53'43.7"N 122°02'34.6"W). Source: FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. As noted in the table above, the cumulative impacts from the project construction and existing sources of TACs would be less than the BAAQMD’s cumulative thresholds of significance. Thus, the cumulative health risk impacts from project construction would be less than significant. 39 Criterion 3: Operational Emissions The proposed project would result in the development and operation of 10 single-family homes. As previously discussed under Impact 3.2(b), the proposed project would not result in a potential CO hotspot. The proposed project would result in a less than significant VMT impact because it would be below the threshold of 20 residential units established by County guidelines. Because the proposed project would not exceed Transportation Analysis Guidelines set by the County, the proposed project would not generate significant daily passenger vehicle trips and thus, the proposed project would not generate a significant amount of DPM emissions during operation. However, gasoline-fueled vehicles would still emit relatively small amounts of gasoline TACs such as benzene, isopentane, and toluene during project operation. Nonetheless, the potential cancer risks associated with non-diesel TACs emitted from gasoline vehicles in the San Francisco Bay Air Basin are substantially less than the potential cancer risks associated with DPM emissions, 29 and are therefore not included in this analysis. Furthermore, these emissions would be dispersed throughout the local roadway network and would not solely be generated at the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors during operation. Criterion 4: Carbon Monoxide Hotspot Assessment As discussed in Impact 2.3(b), the proposed project would not generate sufficient vehicle traffic volumes during project operation to substantiate creating a CO hotspot. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with regard to exposing sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of CO emissions. As such, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Summary As described above, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors at nearby residences, schools, daycares, or community centers to substantial pollutant concentrations during either construction (with mitigation incorporated) or operations. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. d)Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Less than significant impact. As stated in the BAAQMD 2017 Air Quality Guidelines, odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the populations and is subjective. The BAAQMD does not have a recommended odor threshold for construction activities. However, the BAAQMD recommends operational screening criteria that are based on the distance between receptors and types of sources known to generate odors. For projects within the screening distances, the BAAQMD has the following threshold for project operations: 29 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Health Risk Assessment for the Union Pacific Railroad Oakland Railyard. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//railyard/hra/up_oak_hra.pdf?_ga=2.229617876.913681903.1594937953- 503090677.1594937953. Accessed June 6, 2023. An odor source with five or more confirmed complaints per year averaged over 3 years is considered to have a significant impact on receptors within the screening distance shown in Table 3-3 [of the BAAQMD’s guidance]. Two circumstances have the potential to cause odor impacts: 1.A source of odors is proposed to be located near existing or planned sensitive receptors, or 2.A sensitive receptor land use is proposed near an existing or planned source of odor. Projects that would site an odor source or a receptor farther than the applicable screening distance, shown in the table below, would not likely result in a significant odor impact. Odor Screening Distances Land Use/Type of Operation Project Screening Distance Wastewater Treatment Plant 2 miles Wastewater Pumping Facilities 1 mile Sanitary Landfill 2 miles Transfer Station 1 mile Composting Facility 1 mile Petroleum Refinery 2 miles Asphalt Batch Plant 2 miles Chemical Manufacturing 2 miles Fiberglass Manufacturing 1 mile Painting/Coating Operations 1 mile Rendering Plant 2 miles Coffee Roaster 1 mile Food Processing Facility 1 mile Confined Animal Facility/Feed Lot/Dairy 1 mile Green Waste and Recycling Operations 1 mile Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017- clean-air-plan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed October 28, 2022. Project Construction Diesel exhaust and ROGs would be emitted during construction of the proposed project, which are objectionable to some; however, emissions would disperse rapidly from the project site and would be short-term and intermittent in duration and frequency. Therefore, project construction would not generate objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. As such, construction odor impacts would be less than significant. 41 Project Operation Land uses typically associated with odors include wastewater treatment facilities, waste disposal facilities, agricultural operations, or other operations listed in Table Estimated Health Risks and Hazards During Project Construction – Unmitigated. Using GoogleMaps, a chemical manufacturing company (Malaco International, 1910 Olympic Blvd, Walnut Creek, CA 94596) was identified within 2 miles and several coffee roasting shops were identified within the 1-mile screening distances. Public records retrieved from the BAAQMD 30 show that no odor complaints were received for the chemical manufacturing company or any coffee roasting shops within the 2017 to 2022 timeframe. Public records only identified one unconfirmed odor complaint within a 1-mile radius of the project site between 2017 and 2022. As a result, no confirmed odor complaints were filed for sources near the proposed project site. Therefore, the proposed project as a receptor during operation would not experience peculiar odor impacts from sources of odors. The proposed project would construct 10 new single-family homes, whose operations could lead to odors from associated residential laundry cleaning, vehicle exhaust, outdoor cooking, and waste disposal. However, such odors generated by project operation would be intermittent and are not expected to be noticeable at distances that would expose a large number of receptors and are not expected to last for prolong periods of time. Therefore, minor sources of odors expected from project operation would not pose an objectionable odor impact to existing and future receptors. Summary The proposed project, as a source, would not generate any peculiar emissions or odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. In addition, the proposed project would not place sensitive receptors near substantial existing or planned sources of odors based on BAAQMD guidance. This impact would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures MM AIR-1 The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans: a.All exposed non-paved surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and access roads) shall be watered at least two times per day and/or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to exposed non-paved surfaces. b.All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered and/or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard. c.All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. d.All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. 30 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. e.All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. f.Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes, as required by the California Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ACTM) Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations. Clear signage regarding idling restrictions shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. g.All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. h.The prime construction contractor shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. The County and the construction contractor shall take corrective action within 48 hours of receipt of the complaint. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. MM AIR-2 The following Mitigation Measure shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans: a.All off-road equipment equal to or greater than 25 horsepower shall meet either United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or California Air Resources Board (ARB) Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards during all construction activities. b.The project applicant shall submit a construction management plan to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee for review and approval, prior to issuance of any grading and building permits. The construction management plan shall demonstrate that the off-road equipment used on-site to construct the proposed project would comply with Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards. Off-road equipment descriptions and information included in the construction management plan may include but are not limited to equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number 47T47T. 43 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 4.Biological Resources Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? c)Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan? Environmental Evaluation Setting This section evaluates the potential effects on biological resources that may result from implementation of the proposed project. This analysis is based on a Biological Resource Analysis (BRA) Report completed by Olberding Environmental, Inc (Olberding) for the proposed project in July 2021, the BRA subsequently updated in January 2023. Additional supporting reference materials include a Pre-Construction Special-Status Plant Survey Report prepared by Olberding in May 2022 and an Arborist Report prepared by Traverso Tree on January 10, 2023. Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. For the purpose of this analysis, special-status species refers to all species formally listed as threatened and/or endangered under the following: •Federal Endangered Species Act or the California Endangered Species Act (CESA); •California Species of Special Concern, designated as Fully Protected by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and given a California Native Plant Society (CNPS) rank 31 or designated as special-status by city, county, or other reginal planning documents: - Rank 1A: Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere - Rank 1B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere - Rank 2A: Plants presumed extirpated in California but common elsewhere - Rank 2B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere - Rank 3: Plants about which more information is needed - Rank 4: Watch List: Plants of limited distribution Federal and State listed threatened and/or endangered species are legally protected under FESA/CESA. The designated special-status species listed by the CNPS have no direct legal protection but require an analysis of significance of potential impacts under CEQA Guidelines. Special-status plant and wildlife species typically occur in undeveloped areas. Although it is less likely, it is also possible for them to occur within developed areas. Olberding conducted a special-status plant and wildlife species database search using the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California within the Walnut Creek quadrangle and eight surrounding quadrangles.32 Olberding also conducted a reconnaissance-level survey of the project site on July 12, 2021 and a follow up rare plant survey of the project site in April 5, 2022 to determine the potential presence or absence of special-status species listed in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNNDB) and CNPS database and for other potential sensitive species or habitats.33 According to the BRA, there are five habitat types present on-site (see Figure 10 of the BRA): developed (0.11 acre), non-native annual grassland (1.31 acres), ephemeral drainage (0.17 acre), mixed woodland (1.01 acres), and riparian (0.05 acre). Much of the project site consists of non- native annual grassland; vegetation observed within this area included wild oat (Avena fatua), Italian 31 All plants appearing on the CNPS List 1 or 2 are considered to meet the CEQA Guidelines Section 15830 criteria. While only some of the plants ranked 3 and 4 meet the definitions of threatened or endangered species, the CNPS recommends that all Rank 3 and Rank 4 plants be evaluated for consideration under CEQA. 32 Olberding Environmental, Inc. 2021. Biological Resources Assessment Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 33 Ibid. 45 rye grass (Festuca perennis), ripgut brome (Bromus 4 diandrus), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), and hare barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum).34 Special-status Plant Species A plant’s potential to occur on the project site was based on presence of suitable habitats, soil types, and occurrences recorded by the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California CNDDB. Olberding identified 26 special-status plant species have been recorded within a 5-mile radius of the project site (Figure 6 of the BRA).35 Twenty-two of the 26 special-status plant species recorded within the 5-mile radius were identified as having no potential to occur on the project site due to the absence of suitable habitat (e.g., salt marsh, coastal dunes, serpentine soils, vernal pool, etc.), soil composition, and previous development/disturbance and are therefore excluded from further analysis.36 According to the BRA, the remaining four special-status plant species were determined to have a low potential to occur, Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdonii), Diablo helianthella (Helianthella castanea), Mount Diablo fairy-lantern (Calochortus pulchellus), and bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris). Marginal habitat exists within the grassland portion of the project site, though a large portion of the grassland had been recently disked at the time of Olberding’s field survey. Given the potential for these plants to occur, Olberding conducted a focused rare plant survey of the project site in April 2022, during the blooming period for three of these species (Diablo helianthella, Mount Diablo fairy-lantern, and bent-flowered fiddleneck), and none of these species were observed; thus, they are presumed absent37. Although the April 2022 survey was conducted outside of the blooming period for Congdon’s tarplant (June– November), remnant plants would have been observed if this species was present. Moreover, the July 2021 reconnaissance survey was conducted during the blooming period for this species, and it was not observed. Thus, Congdon’s tarplant is also presumed absent from the project site. Attachment 2, Table 2 of the BRA includes a species-specific discussion of all special-status plants with the potential to occur within or in the immediate vicinity of the project site, based on a review of the surrounding quadrangles. No special-status or rare plants occur within the project site based on multiple field surveys conducted by Olberding. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on special-status or rare plants and no mitigation would be required. Special-status Wildlife Species The potential for wildlife to occur on the project site was based on the presence of suitable habitats and occurrences recorded by the CNDDB and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) within the Walnut Creek and eight surrounding quadrangles. Forty-one special-status wildlife species have been recorded with the potential to occur within the greater vicinity of the project site based on the literature review.38 Thirty of the 41 special-status wildlife species were determined either not likely to occur or to have no potential to occur due to absence of suitable habitat and/or site-specific 34 Olberding Environmental, Inc. 2021. Biological Resources Assessment Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 35 Ibid. 36 Ibid. 37 Olberding Environmental, Inc. 2021. Biological Resources Assessment Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 38 Olberding Environmental, Inc. 2021. Biological Resources Assessment Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. habitat conditions and are therefore excluded from further analysis. See Attachment 2, Table 2 of the BRA, which includes a species-specific discussion of all 41 special-status wildlife species. Eleven special-status wildlife species were determined to have potential to occur on the project site: red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius) hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), western red bat (Lasiurus frantzii), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis), and Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus).39 These species are addressed in more detail below. Nesting birds: red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, Cooper's hawk, white-tailed kite, and American kestrel The trees and shrubs present throughout the project site and riparian vegetation adjacent to the ephemeral drainage provide nesting habitat for bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Fish and Game Code. These species include red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, Cooper’s hawk, white-tailed kite, American kestrel, and common songbirds (passerine birds). Construction activities could disturb nesting and breeding birds in trees and shrubs within and around the project site. Potential impacts on special-status and migratory birds that could result from construction and operation of the proposed project include destruction of eggs or occupied nests, mortality of young, and abandonment of nests with eggs or young birds prior to fledging. If MBTA and/or Fish and Game Code protected species’ nests are present, impacts to these species would be significant. MM BIO-1 would require pre-construction surveys and modification of construction activities to avoid disturbance of any active nests, including active nests of special- status bird species, if present, which would reduce impacts to migratory and nesting birds and raptors protected under the MBTA and Fish and Game Code (including special-status species) to less than significant levels. Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the CDD shall determine if project construction-related activities will take place during the nesting season, and if so, the avian pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. Roosting bats: hoary bat, western red bat, pallid bat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, and Yuma myotis The project site contains existing structures and trees that could provide suitable bat-roosting habitat. Potential direct and indirect impacts could occur to roosting bats due to removal of potential roosting habitat during project construction. These activities could potentially subject bats to risk of death or injury, and they are likely to avoid using the area until such construction activities have dissipated or ceased. Relocation, in turn, could cause hunger or stress among individual bats by displacing them into adjacent territories belonging to other individuals; impacts to these species would be significant. MM BIO-2 would require a roosting bat survey to be conducted prior to the start of project construction to reduce potential impacts to roosting bats to less than significant levels. Alameda whipsnake The Alameda whipsnake is one of two subspecies of the California whipsnake. It is distinguished from the chaparral whipsnake (M. l. lateralis) by the broad orange striping on its sides. Adults reach approximately three to five feet in length and show a sooty black to dark brown back, cream colored undersides and pinkish tail. This species is typically found in chaparral, northern coastal sage scrub, and coastal sage habitats; however, annual grasslands, oak woodlands, and oak savanna serve as 39 Ibid. 47 habitat during the breeding season. Egg-laying occurs near scrub habitat on ungrazed grasslands with scattered shrub cover. The known distribution for Alameda whipsnake includes Sobrante Ridge, Oakland Hills, Mount Diablo, the Black Hills, and Wauhab Ridge.40 CNDDB listed 20 occurrences of Alameda whipsnake within 5 miles of the project site. The exact locations of these collections were not recorded in the CNDDB due to the sensitivity of this species. Refer to Attachment 1 Figure 5 of the BRA to see approximate range of listed occurrences. The project site does not overlap with USFWS designated critical habitat (unit: 3) (See Attachment 1 Figure 7 of the BRA). USFWS designated critical habitat for Alameda whipsnake is located approximately 2 miles east within the Shell Ridge Open Space. The project site contains grassland habitat but lacks scrub or rock outcrop cover which the Alameda whipsnake characteristically prefers. However, the southwestern boundary of the Shell Ridge Open Space is located approximately 0.3 mile northeast of the project site. Alameda whipsnake could utilize the project site for dispersal as it moves to and from more suitable habitat. For these reasons, Alameda whipsnake has a low potential to occur on the project site in a dispersal capacity only.41 Project implementation could result in disturbance or loss of this species if present during grading and construction. Implementation of MM BIO-3, which requires a pre-construction survey and conducting an Environmental Awareness training would help to identify and avoid dispersing individuals, minimizing the impacts of project-related activities on the Alameda whipsnake to less than significant. Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the reptile pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. In conclusion, project implementation would require grading within suitable habitat for special- status species, as well as the removal of trees and structures that provide suitable habitat for passerine birds and raptors, and roosting bats. Implementation of the recommendations detailed in the BRA, and demonstrated as MM BIO-1 through MM BIO-3 respectively below, would reduce impacts to special-status species to less than significant. b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The CDFW maintains a list of natural communities that classifies vegetation types found within the State of California and ranks them based on rarity. Communities ranked S1-S3 are considered sensitive natural communities.42 Riparian habitats are typically considered sensitive natural communities and are addressed in the environmental review process. The project site contains one sensitive natural community, riparian habitat. This natural community is discussed below. The BRA identified 0.05 acre of riparian habitat adjacent to an ephemeral drainage, which runs along the northern boundary of the project site. Dominate tree species observed included valley oak 40 Olberding Environmental, Inc. 2021. Biological Resources Assessment Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 41 Ibid. 42 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Natural Communities List, Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities#sensitive%20natural%20communities. Accessed January 11, 2023. (Quercus lobata) and black walnut (Juglans hindsii). Understory species observed include wild oat (Avena fatua), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), and soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus).43 Project construction would avoid direct impacts to on-site sensitive natural communities. While the proposed project would avoid direct impacts to sensitive natural communities, project construction has the potential for indirect (temporary) adverse impacts to on-site aquatic features. Potential temporary indirect impacts include pollutant loading, increased erosion and sedimentation, and debris dispersal. Implementation of MM BIO-4 would reduce potential indirect adverse impacts to on-site sensitive natural communities to less than significant levels by avoiding work in riparian habitat and on-site aquatic features, implementing erosion control measures, and the prevention of substances toxic to fish and wildlife from leaching into riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the riparian corridor and ephemeral drainage will be fenced off to make sure no work takes place in this area, unless evidence is provided to the CDD that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) reviewed and approved work within these areas. c)Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. While the project site does not contain seasonal wetlands, 0.17 acre of ephemeral drainage and it associated riparian habitat runs from the northeast to northwest corner of the project site. According to the BRA, this drainage and its associated riparian habitat may be considered jurisdictional by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or the CDFW.44 As discussed in the checklist question above, project design would avoid direct impacts to the ephemeral drainage, and its associated riparian habitat. Moreover, implementation of MM BIO-4 would reduce potential indirect adverse impacts these on-site aquatic features to a less than significant level through erosion control measures and preventing substances toxic to fish and wildlife from leaching into these features. d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the BRA identified areas of ephemeral drainage which flow from the northeast corner to the northwest corner of the project site flanked by riparian corridors at the eastern and western ends. The ephemeral drainage empties into a partially buried concrete culvert at the northwestern boundary of the project site. The proposed project would not disturb any portion of the ephemeral drainage or riparian habitat. Furthermore, the project site is in an urbanized area and is surrounded by single-family residences which further constrain wildlife movement. For these reasons, the proposed project is not expected to have any significant impact on wildlife corridors or to impede the use of nursery sites, therefore project-related impacts would be less than significant. 43 Olberding Environmental, Inc. 2021. Biological Resources Assessment Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 44 Ibid. 49 e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. Tree removal in the County is regulated under Contra Costa County Code Chapter 816-6, Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. According to the Arborist Report prepared for the proposed project, the project site contains 74 trees, 14 of which are protected trees. Based on the proposed project’s grading plan, the Arborist Report recommends the preservation of 31 trees and the removal of 43 trees.45 Of the 43 trees to be removed, four are protected under the County’s Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance.46 If not properly protected, the trees proposed for preservation could also be subject to injury or inadequate maintenance during construction, which represents a potentially significant impact. The response of individual trees would depend on the amount of excavation and grading, the care with which demolition is undertaken, and the construction methods. As the construction of the proposed project requires the removal of trees subject to the Contra Costa County Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, the applicant would be required to prepare and implement a tree replacement plan. In addition, remaining trees that are proposed for preservation on the project site would be preserved through the implementation of the tree preservations guidelines identified and outlined in the Arborist Report. As a part of approval for development, the applicant would be required to demonstrate and implement consistency with the County’s tree ordinance, including tree removal permits and protection of preserved trees. Implementation of MM BIO-5, which requires the project applicant to implement a tree replacement plan, and MM BIO-6 requiring the project applicant to implement tree preservation guidelines during construction, impacts related to consistency with local policies or ordinances that protect biological resources would be less than significant. f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan? No Impact. The proposed project does not lie within the boundaries of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or State HCP.47 Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures MM BIO-1 Pre-construction Avian Survey If project construction-related activities would take place during the nesting season (February through August), pre-construction surveys for nesting passerine birds and raptors (birds of prey) within the project site and the large trees within the adjacent riparian area should be conducted by a qualified Biologist no more than 14 days prior to the commencement of the tree removal or site grading activities. If any bird listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) is found to be nesting within the 45 Traverso Tree. 2023. Arborist Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard, Walnut Creek, California. 46 Ibid. 47 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2019. California Natural Community Conservation Plans. Website: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=68626&inline. Accessed December 21, 2022. project site or within the area of influence, an adequate protective buffer zone should be established by a qualified Biologist to protect the nesting site. This buffer shall be a minimum of 75 feet from the project activities for passerine birds, and a minimum of 200 feet for raptors. The distance shall be determined by a qualified Biologist based on the site conditions (topography, if the nest is in a line of sight of the construction and the sensitivity of the birds nesting). The nest site(s) shall be monitored by a qualified Biologist periodically to see if the birds are stressed by the construction activities and if the protective buffer needs to be increased. Once the young have fledged and are flying well enough to avoid project construction zones (typically by August), a qualified Biologist shall determine if the project can proceed without further regard to the nest site(s). Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the CDD shall determine if project construction-related activities will take place during the nesting season, and if so, the avian pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. MM BIO-2 Pre-construction Bat Survey To avoid “take” of special-status bats, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented prior to the removal of any existing trees or structures on the project site: If project construction-related activities take place during seasonal periods of bat activity (mid–February through mid–October – ca. February 15–April 15, and August 15–October 30), a bat habitat assessment within the project site shall be conducted by a qualified Bat Biologist to determine suitability of each tree or existing structure as bat roost habitat. Structures found to have no suitable openings can be considered clear for project activities as long as they are maintained so that new openings do not occur. Structures found to provide suitable roosting habitat, but without evidence of use by bats, may be sealed until project activities occur, as recommended by the Bat Biologist. Structures with openings and exhibiting evidence of use by bats shall be scheduled for humane bat exclusion and eviction, conducted during appropriate seasons, and under supervision of a qualified Bat Biologist. Bat exclusion and eviction shall only occur between February 15 and April 15, and from August 15 through October 30, in order to avoid take of non-volant (non-flying or inactive, either young, or seasonally torpid) individuals. Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the CDD shall determine if project construction-related activities will take place during seasonal periods of bat activity, and if so, the bat habitat assessment shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. MM BIO-3 Pre-construction Reptile Survey and Impact Avoidance While potential occurrence of Alameda whipsnake is limited to dispersal throughout the project site, a pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be conducted no more than 48 hours prior to the commencement of tree removal or project construction-related activities to determine presence/absence of these species. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. Prior to issuance of a 51 building or grading permit, the reptile pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. MM BIO-4 Avoidance and Minimization Measures for Riparian Habitat and On-site Aquatic Features No work (including vegetation removal) shall take place within the riparian corridor and ephemeral drainage as indicated in the Biological Resource Analysis (BRA) Report completed by Olberding Environmental, Inc (Olberding) dated January 2023, unless evidence is provided to the CDD that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) reviewed and approved work within these areas. The plan set for a building permit shall show fencing that is approved by a qualified biologist to ensure work does not take place in this area. As-built photos shall be required prior to issuance of a grading or building permit to ensure that this fencing is installed. MM BIO-5 Avoidance and Minimization Measures for Riparian Habitat and On-site Aquatic Features At no time shall silt-laden runoff be allowed to enter on-site aquatic features and their associated habitats. Erosion control measures shall be utilized throughout all phases of operation where sediment runoff from the project may enter these aquatic features. Best Management Practices (BMPs) to avoid erosion, uncontrolled stormwater runoff and bank deterioration shall be implemented, following the requirements of the proposed project’s Stormwater Control Plan, and typically include silt fencing, coir rolls, and/or straw bale dikes. MM BIO-6 Avoidance and Minimization Measures for Riparian Habitat and On-site Aquatic Features No substances toxic to fish and wildlife shall be discharged or allowed to leach into the aquatic features present on-site. Materials deleterious or toxic to fish and wildlife, including, but not limited to, asphalt, tires, concrete, construction materials, treated wood, and creosote containing materials, shall not be stockpiled within 100 feet of any aquatic feature present on-site. MM BIO-7 Prepare and Implement a Tree Replacement Plan As a result of tree removal, approval of a Tree Permit under the provisions of the County Tree Ordinance shall be required. The Tree Permit shall include a Tree Replacement Plan. The Tree Replacement Plan shall designate the approximate location, number, species and sizes of new trees to be planted. No tree shall be removed until a building or grading permit is issued. MM BIO-8 Implement Tree Preservation Guidelines During Construction To protect the trees to remain, approval of a Tree Permit under the provisions of the County Tree Ordinance shall be required. The Tree Permit shall include tree protection mitigation measures as described in the arborist report prepared by Jennifer Tso (#WE-10270A) of Traverso Tree Service dated January 10, 2023 48, and these mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction through the clearing, grading, and construction phases, and stated on all construction plans. 48 Traverso Tree. 2023. Arborist Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard, Walnut Creek, California. 53 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 5.Cultural Resources Would the project: a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as pursuant to Section 15064.5? b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c)Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 18.Tribal Cultural Resources Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: d)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or e)A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Environmental Evaluation Setting This section describes the existing cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) setting and potential effects from the proposed project implementation on the project site and its surrounding area. The analysis in this section is based, in part, on the Historic Resource Assessment (HRA) completed by FCS on December 16, 2022, and an Archaeological Survey Report completed by Garcia and Associates (GANDA) on March 18, 2020. Archaeological Survey Report On March 18, 2020, GANDA completed a cultural resources assessment for the proposed project. The results of this cultural resource assessment were informed by a records search of the Northwest Information System (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), a literature and archival review, Native American tribal consultation, and a pedestrian survey of the project site. Northwest Information Records Search A records search for the project site and its 0.25-mile radius were conducted on February 24, 2020, at the NWIC, located at Sonoma a State University in Rohnert Park, California. The purpose of this records search was to compile information pertaining to the locations of previously recorded cultural resources and prior cultural resources studies within the study area and its vicinity. The results of the NWIC records search identified two previously recorded historic-period archaeological resources within 0.25 mile of the project site. Both are historic buildings. The records search identified three studies within 0.25 mile of the project site. Native American Consultation A GANDA Archaeologist initiated consultation via email with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on February 26, 2020, to determine whether any sacred sites were located within the project site or its vicinity. A response was received on February 27, 2020, indicating that no sacred sites were identified within the project site. Native American consultation under Assembly Bill (AB) 52 of CEQA is the responsibility of the Lead Agency, which was completed prior to the preparation of this report. Archaeological Field Survey On February 28, 2020, a GANDA Archaeologist conducted an intensive pedestrian survey of the project site. to determine the presence or absence of archaeological resources. The ground surface was examined for the presence of prehistoric artifacts, prehistoric milling surfaces on exposed bedrock, historic-era artifacts, sediment discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, and depressions and other features that might indicate the former presence of historic-era structures or buildings. Ground disturbances such as rodent holes, burrows, and cut banks were also visually inspected. No archaeological resources were observed. Historic Resources Assessment FCS Staff Archaeologist Taylor Love conducted an architectural field survey and HRA of the project site on November 21, 2022. The project site contains a single-family residence that was constructed in 1954. The residence was assessed on its own merits for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and/or the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and was found to be ineligible. Based on the results of the records searches, archival research and architectural field survey, FCS con siders the project site to have low sensitivity for historic resources. FCS concluded that there are no unique historic resources located on the project site as defined under California Public Resources Code Sections 15064.5 and 5024.1. 55 Cultural Resources Would the project: a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less than significant impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 defines “historical resources” as resources listed in the CRHR, a local register, determined significant by the Lead Agency, or determined to be eligible by the California Historical Resources Commission for listing in the CRHR. The criteria for eligibility are generally set by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which established the NRHP, and which recognizes properties that are significant at the federal, State, and local levels. To be eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR, a district, site, building, structure, or object must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association relative to American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture.49 In addition, unless the property possesses exceptional significance, it must be at least 50 years old to be eligible. Historical significance is assessed against the following NRHP/CRHR criteria: Criterion A: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or Criterion B: Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or Criterion C: Embodied of distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that possess high artistic value, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or Criterion D: Yielded, or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history. The GANDA 2020 record search conducted at the NWIC determined that two historic-era resources are within a 0.25-mile radius of the project site, none of which are located within the project boundaries. The 2020 pedestrian survey did not identify any potentially historic resources within the proposed project site. However, the project site does contain one existing single-family residence. According to the HRA, historic topographic maps and records obtained from the Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office indicate that construction of the residence was completed in 1954. Therefore, the residence is more than 50 years in age. However, the HRA Report concluded that the assessed property is not eligible for listing in the CRHR under any of the criteria listed above. Therefore, the building on-site does not qualify as significant historical resources under CEQA and impacts would be less than significant. b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines defines significant archaeological resources as resources that meet the criteria for historical resources, as discussed above, or resources that constitute unique archaeological resources. A project-related 49 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). 2022. Publications of the National Register of Historic Places. Website: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/publications.htm. Accessed June 6, 2023. significant adverse effect could occur if a project were to affect archaeological resources that fall under either of these categories. As discussed above, the NWIC records search identified two previously recorded historic-period archaeological resources and three studies within 0.25-mile of the project site. Based on the results of the records searches, archival research and field survey, the HRA concluded that the project site has low sensitivity for historic resources. Furthermore, the Archaeological Survey Report concluded that the potential to encounter archaeological resources during project implementation is low. Nevertheless, it is possible that earthmoving activities associated with project construction could encounter previously undiscovered archaeological resources. Archaeological resources can include but are not limited to stone, bone, wood or shell artifacts or features, including hearths and structural elements. Damage or destruction of these resources would be a potentially significant impact. Implementation of MM CUL-1 would reduce this potential impact to less than significant. c)Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. No human remains or cemeteries are known to exist within or near the project site. While it is unlikely that human remains exist within or near the project site, there is always a possibility that subsurface construction activities associated with the proposed project, such as grading or trenching, could potentially damage or destroy previously undiscovered human remains. Accordingly, potential impacts would be limited to construction activities. In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 must be followed. MM CUL-2 further specifies the procedures to follow in the event human remains are uncovered. Along with compliance with required guidelines and statutes, implementation of MM CUL-2 would reduce potential impacts to human remains to a less than significant level. Tribal Cultural Resources Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: d)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. A review of the CRHR, local registers of historic resources, the NWIC records search results, and NAHC Sacred Lands File search, and the pedestrian survey failed to identify any previously listed TCRs that may be adversely affected by the proposed projects. However, as discussed above, construction activities may result in potentially significant impacts should any undiscovered TCRs be encountered. Implementation of MM CUL-1 and MM CUL- 2 would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. 57 e)A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Tribal consultation efforts conducted by Contra Costa County pursuant to AB 52 to identify additional significant TCRs meeting the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 was initiated on September 22, 2021, and January 5, 2023, respectively. Consultation commenced on September 22, 2022, with Wilton Rancheria and concluded on October 22, 2022. Wilton Rancheria provided no comments pertaining to the proposed project. The County received an additional response on January 7, 2023, from the Confe derated Villages of Lisjan Nation formally commencing consultation efforts as well requesting additional information about the proposed project and NAHC Sacred Lands File results. The Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation received the requested information and were satisfied with the results of the Archaeological Survey report. The tribe provided no further comments. Tribal consultation concluded on February 6, 2023. However, as previously discussed, construction activities may result in potentially significant impacts should any undiscovered TCRs be encountered. Implementation of MM CUL-1 and MM CUL-2 would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures MM CUL-1 Unidentified Cultural Materials All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. MM CUL-2 Encountering Human Remains In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: a.There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. b.Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: •The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. •The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. •The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. 59 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 6.Energy Would the project: a)Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b)Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Environmental Evaluation Setting Energy is generally transmitted either in the form of electricity, measured in kilowatts (kW) or megawatts (MW), or natural gas measured in US Therms. Electricity is used primarily for lighting, appliances, and other uses associated with the proposed project. Natural gas is used primarily for space and water heating, when applicable; however, natural gas use is not anticipated in the proposed project. The proposed project would adopt an all-electric design and would not include natural gas use. However, natural gas use is included in CalEEMod to provide a conservative estimate of air quality and GHG emissions; the CalEEMod estimates are used as a basis for the energy consumption calculations referenced in this section. Would the project: a)Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy. Construction and operations are discussed separately below. Construction The anticipated construction schedule for the proposed project was assumed to occur from the first quarter of 2023 through the first quarter of 2024, lasting approximately 12 months. Should the construction schedule would move to later years, construction energy demand would likely decrease because of improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements as older, less efficient equipment is replaced by newer and cleaner equipment. The proposed project would require demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coating, and paving activities. Project construction would require energy for the manufacturing and transportation of building materials, preparation of the site (e.g., site clearing, and grading), and construction of the building. Petroleum-based fuels such as diesel fuel and gasoline would be the primary sources of energy for these tasks. The types of on-site equipment used during construction of the proposed project could include gasoline- and diesel-powered construction and transportation equipment, including trucks, bulldozers, frontend loaders, forklifts, and cranes. Construction equipment is estimated to consume a total of 25,905 gallons of diesel fuel over the entire construction duration 50. Fuel use associated with construction vehicle trips generated by the proposed project was also estimated; trips include construction worker trips, haul truck trips for material transport, and vendor trips for construction material deliveries. Fuel use from these vehicles traveling to the project site was based on (1) the projected number of trips the proposed project would generate during construction, (2) average trip distances by trip type, and (3) fuel efficiencies estimated in the ARB Emissions Factors model (EMFAC) mobile source emission model51. In total, the proposed project is estimated to generate 134,771 VMT and a combined 6,473 gallons of gasoline and diesel for vehicle travel during construction. Other equipment could include construction lighting, field services (office trailers), and electrically driven equipment such as pumps and other tools. Single-wide mobile office trailers, which are commonly used in construction staging areas, generally range in size from 160 square feet to 720 square feet. A typical 720-square-foot office trailer would consume approximately 8,930 kilowatt- hours (kWh) during the 13-month construction 52. The proposed project’s construction is not anticipated to result in unusually high energy use. Limitations on idling of vehicles and equipment and requirements that equipment be properly maintained would result in fuel savings. Similarly, compliance with State regulations would limit idling from on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment. For example, equipment and fuel are not typically used wastefully due to the added expense associated with renting, maintaining, and fueling the equipment. Therefore, it is anticipated that construction of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary energy consumption, and energy impacts during construction would be less than significant. Operation The proposed project would consume energy as part of building operations and transportation activities. The proposed project would be built to all-electric design standards. Energy consumption of the proposed project is summarized in the table below. Annual Project Energy Consumption Energy Consumption Activity Annual Consumption Electricity Consumption 78,105 kWh Fuel Consumption 7,341 gallons 50 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 51 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 52 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 61 Energy Consumption Activity Annual Consumption Notes: kBTU = kilo-British Thermal Unit kWh = kilowatt-hour Source: FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. Unmitigated operation of the proposed project would consume an estimated 78,105 kWh of electricity on an annual basis. The single-family homes would include rooftop solar as part of the construction, consistent with Title 24 requirements. Therefore, a portion of electricity used at the project site would be provided through on-site renewable energy. The proposed project would be considered to result in a potentially significant impact if it would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. This is assessed below by reviewing whether the proposed project would conflict with the following energy conservation goals: •Decreasing overall per capita energy consumption; •Decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, or oil; and •Increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. Decreasing Reliance on Fossil Fuels The proposed project would be designed and constructed in accordance with the California Building Code energy efficiency standards. For example, the proposed project would install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems capable of generating renewable electricity, high-efficiency indoor and outdoor lighting, and low-flow plumbing fixtures and irrigation heads that are compliant with the California Building Code. California Building Code energy efficiency standards include a broad set of energy conservation requirements that apply to the structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems in a building. Compliance with the California Building Code would help reduce the amount of energy required for lighting, water heating, and heating and air conditioning in buildings and promote energy conservation. As a result, the increase in energy conservation and efficiency would reduce the amount of potentially fossil fuel-sourced electricity consumption, and thereby reducing project reliance on fossil fuels. Additionally, the proposed project would adopt an all-electric design, consistent with County Ordinance 2022-02, which would further reduce use of fossil fuels. Project-related vehicle trips would consume fuel throughout the life of the proposed project resulting from residents’ vehicles and delivery vehicles traveling to and from the project site. This analysis evaluated operational fuel consumption based on the proposed project’s operational assumptions. Regional access to the project site is provided by I-680, which is 1 mile west of the project site. As a result, the proposed project is located near regional and local roadways that would provide convenient access for future residents and would not result in excessively long VMT. Thus, the location of the proposed project would help minimize fossil fuel reliance with respect to transportation fuel consumption. Increasing Reliance on Renewable Energy Sources The proposed project would be considered to conflict with this criterion if it did not take steps to increase the reliance on renewable energy sources. As the proposed project constitutes a low-rise residential development, it would be required by the California Building Code to incorporate rooftop solar. As such, the proposed project would incorporate on-site PV systems, thereby actively increasing future residents’ reliance on renewable energy sources. Furthermore, consistent with Moreover, the proposed project would include applicable electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, such as pre-wiring, to facilitate future EV charging within each garage. As a result, the proposed project would incrementally increase overall reliance on renewable energy sources by including on-site renewable energy generation technologies, incorporating an all-electric design, and incorporating EV charging infrastructure to facilitate the future use of EVs. Summary Considering the above analysis, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficiency, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. This impact would be less than significant. b)Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than significant impact. Construction The proposed project would consume energy through the combustion of fossil fuels. Limitations on idling of vehicles and equipment and requirements that equipment be properly maintained would result in fuel savings. California Code of Regulations Title 13 Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485 limit idling from both on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment and are enforced by the ARB. The proposed project would be required to comply with these regulations. There are no renewable energy standards that would apply to construction of the proposed project. As a result, construction would not conflict with or obstruct any regulations adopted for the purposes of increasing the use of renewable energy. Operation The proposed project would be served with electricity provided by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). In 2021, PG&E obtained 48 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources, while the remaining electricity was sourced from nuclear (39 percent), large hydroelectric (4 percent), and natural gas (9 percent).53 PG&E also offers a Solar Choice 50 percent option that sources 71 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources, and a Solar Choice 100 percent option that sources 94 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project’s electricity provider meets the State’s current objective of 33 percent. The proposed project’s electricity provider would also be required to meet the State’s future objective of 60 percent of in-State electricity sales being generated from renewable energy sources by 2030. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards (for example, EV charging infrastructure and solar requirements) in effect at the time building permit applications are submitted. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the applicable plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to energy efficiency and renewable energy standards consistency. 53 California Energy Commission. 2022. Power Content Label. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and- topics/programs/power-source-disclosure/power-content-label/annual-power-content-2. Accessed June 6, 2023. 63 Summary As energy consumption resulting from construction and operation of the proposed project would not constitute a conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, this impact would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None required. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 7.Geology and Soils Would the project: a)Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i)Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map 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. ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv)Landslides? b)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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? d)Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Environmental Evaluation The analysis in this section is based, in part, on the Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration (Geotechnical Exploration) prepared by ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO) on March 12, 2020. Setting Geotechnical Exploration ENGEO conducted a Geotechnical Exploration which included excavation of six test pits within the site on February 25, 2020. During the excavation, ENGEO encountered an existing fill layer that ranged from approximately 1 to 3.5 feet thick, which consisted of sandy silt and sandy clay. Native 65 surficial soil (Colluvium) deposits consisting of fat clay ranging from few feet to over approximately 8 feet thick were encountered in the mantling bedrock across the site. The site’s surficial soil is underlain by mudstone, sandstone, and conglomerate bedrock. The bedrock is highly weathered and very weak near the surface, but becomes less weathered, and moderately strong at depth. Atterberg limit testing of the existing soil encountered at the site yielded a Plasticity Index (PI) of 44 for the native clayey soil and PI of 13 for the mudstone, which indicates that the site soil has a moderate to very high expansion potential. Groundwater was not observed in any of the subsurface explorations at the site. Refer to the Geotechnical Exploration for specific details regarding subsurface conditions and PI testing for site subsurface conditions. An active fault is defined by the State Mining and Geology Board as one that has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). The Geotechnical Exploration determined that the site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone (1982) for active faults, and no known faults cross the site. The nearest known active fault surface trace is the Mount Diablo Thrust fault, which is mapped approximately 1.3 miles south of the site. Other active faults near the site are summarized in the Geotechnical Exploration and include the Mount Diablo Thrust fault, Calaveras fault, and the Hayward-Rodgers Creek fault. Because of the presence of nearby active faults, the Bay Area Region is considered seismically active. Numerous small earthquakes occur every year in the region, and large (greater than Moment Magnitude 7) earthquakes have been recorded and can be expected to occur in the future. Based on the field exploration and review of readily available published maps for the site, ENGEO determined that the site is feasible for development of the proposed project. Paleontological Records Search Results A paleontological records search of the University of California Museum of Paleontology was performed on October 4, 2022, by Dr. Kenneth Finger for the project site. The surface of the project site consists of the Pliocene to late Miocene Orinda formation (Tor), while the surrounding 0.5-mile search area also includes Holocene alluvium (Qa) and late to middle Miocene Monterey Formation. Holocene deposits are too young to be considered fossiliferous. The records search indicated four vertebrate localities in the County, but only a single cetacean vertebra more than 10 miles away from the project site has been entered into the database. The Orinda Formation has 23 vertebrate locations listed for the County as well as three for Alameda County, with a composite assemblage of 140 specimens. The locality nearest the project site is in Orinda, located more than 5 miles to the west. Wo uld the project: a)Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i)Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map 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. Less than significant impact. The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, however, the project site is located in a seismically active region. As discussed above, the nearest known active fault surface trace is the Mount Diablo Thrust fault located approximately 1.3 miles south of the site. Because there are no known active faults crossing the project site and because the project site is not located within an Earthquake Fault Special Study Zone, the Geotechnical Exploration concluded that ground rupture is unlikely. Furthermore, the proposed project's design and construction would comply with the 2022 California Building Standards Code (CBC), as required by Title 7, Section 74-2 of the Ordinance Code, which would reduce impacts related to the rupture of nearby faults. Therefore, the proposed project’s impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault would be less than significant. ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the proposed project is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zone and no known active faults cross the project site. However, the Geotechnical Exploration states that a moderate to high magnitude earthquake generated within the San Francisco Bay Region could cause considerable shaking at the project site, similar to what has occurred in the past. The intensity of ground shaking is determined by factors such as distance from the fault, magnitude and duration of the earthquake, and site-specific geologic conditions. The proposed project would comply with the 2022 CBC, as required by Section 74-2 of the Ordinance Code, which includes requirements related to seismic safety design features to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic shaking. Therefore, compliance with applicable State and local regulatory requirements would reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than significant impact. Liquefaction is the result of seismic activity and is characterized as the transformation of loosely water-saturated soils from a solid state to a liquid state after ground shaking. For liquefaction to occur, three conditions must be present: (1) shallow groundwater; (2) low density, fine, clean sandy soils; and (3) high-intensity ground motion. The Geotechnical Exploration concluded that because the project site is underlain by weathered mudstone at shallow depths, groundwater was not encountered during the exploration, and the existing fill will be removed and recompacted, the project site is not considered susceptible to liquefaction. As such, impacts would be less than significant. iv)Landslides? Less than significant impact. As shown on Figure 10-6, Geological (Landslide) Hazards, in the Safety Element of the General Plan, the majority of the area located within and near Walnut Creek is not 67 subject to significant landslide hazards.54 While the project site does contain some areas with slopes of up to 50 percent,55 the General Plan identifies the project site as being in an area with slopes of less than 26 degrees. Furthermore, the project site is located in a relatively flat area of the County and surrounded by existing development. As such, the proposed project result in significant impacts related to landslides. Impacts would be less than significant. b)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than significant impact. The project site contains an existing, vacant, single-family residence. The proposed project includes the demolition of the existing structure and the construction of 10 single-family homes. The proposed project would therefore involve ground-disturbing activities such as grading and excavation that have the potential to cause erosion and loss of topsoil. As discussed above, the Geotechnical Exploration encountered an existing fill layer in the test pits, which ranged from approximately 1 to 3½ feet thick and consists of sandy silt and sandy clay. The Geotechnical Exploration concluded that, since the compaction data of the fill are unknown, all existing fill should be removed to the depth of competent native soil, as evaluated by ENGEO, and replaced with engineered fill. Since the proposed project would disturb more than 1 acre of land during construction, it would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit from the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) consistent with the County’s General Permit (No. CAS612008) and to comply with its conditions and requirements, which are designed to minimize potential erosion issues. Compliance with the County’s NPDES permit would ensure that a Stormwater Control Plan is prepared and Best Management Practices (BMPs) are implemented that would prevent sediments and other pollutants from entering the stormwater system. As such, impacts related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil as a result of the proposed project would be less than significant. c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 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? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the project site is not located in an area that is subject to significant landslide hazards and is not considered susceptible to liquefaction. The Geotechnical Exploration determined that regional subsidence is considered to be low to negligible at the site. Furthermore, given the shallow bedrock on the west wide of the project site, the consistency of the bedrock, and the absence of groundwater the Geotechnical Exploration concluded that the potential for lateral spreading at the project site is negligible. d)Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. As described above, ENGEO performed plasticity testing of the site soil and bedrock. PI of the native clay was found to be as high as 44, and the PI of the fine content of the bedrock is 13. These test results indicate that the native clay material on-site has a very high expansion potential and the bedrock has a moderate expansion potential. Expansive soil shrinks and swells as a result of moisture changes, which can cause heaving 54 Contra Costa County. 2005. Safety Element. Figure 10-6, Geological (Landslide) Hazards. 55 dk Engineering. 2022. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses. June 23. and cracking of slabs-on-grade, pavements, and structures founded on shallow foundations. Successful construction on expansive soil requires special attention during grading, and it is imperative to keep exposed soil moist by occasional sprinkling. If the soil dries, it is extremely difficult to remoisturize without excavation, moisture conditioning, and decompaction because of the clayey nature of the soil. The Geotechnical Exploration included subgrade soil requirements, which have been included herein under MM GEO-1, which would ensure proper methods for construction on expansive soil. With implementation of MM GEO-1, impacts related to expansive soil would be less than significant. e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No impact. The proposed project would utilize existing wastewater utility connection provided by the Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District. Septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be used. Therefore, no impact would occur. f)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. A significant adverse effect could occur if grading or excavation activities associated with a project would disturb paleontological resources or geologic features that presently exist within the project site. The project site is located in an urbanized area and is surrounded by existing roads and residential development. The project site has been previously disturbed by past development activities and currently contains an existing single-family home, which would be demolished as part of the proposed project. As discussed above, the proposed project would involve ground-disturbing activities such as grading and excavation. The paleontological records search conducted for the proposed project determined that the surface of the project site consists of the Pliocene to late Miocene Orinda formation (Tor). This area has alternatively been mapped as part of the Green Valley and Tassajara Formation, however, both designations are considered equally fossiliferous due to their similar ages and compositions.56 As identified in the Geotechnical Exploration, ENGEO encountered an existing layer of artificial fill on the surface of the project site that consisted of sandy silt and sandy clay, and ranged from approximately 1 to 3.5 feet in depth. While paleontological monitoring of all earth-disturbing activities was recommended by Dr. Finger in his report, this does not include the surface layer of modern fill encountered by ENGEO in their report. As a result of these findings, MM GEO-2 stipulates that paleontological monitoring is required for all earth disturbing activities exceeding the minimum depth of the fill layer at 1 foot. The measure also outlines procedures for the inadvertent discovery of any paleontological resources. With the implementation of MM GEO-2, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features. 56 R.W. Graymer, V.E. Langenheim. Regional Geology of Mount Diablo, California: Its Tectonic Evolution on the North America Plate Boundary. GSA Memoir, 217. 2021. 69 Mitigation Measures MM GEO-1 Implementation of Geology and Soils Measures During Construction Prior to submittal of a building or grading permit, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. MM GEO-2 Construction Monitoring by a Qualified Paleontologist The applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made accessible for future study. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, evidence shall be provided to CDD that a qualified paleontologist is contracted to implement this mitigation measure. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 8.Greenhouse Gas Emissions Would the project: a)Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b)Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Environmental Evaluation The analysis in this section is based, in part, on the emission estimates prepared for the project using CalEEMod 57. Setting Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as greenhouse gases (GHG). The effect is analogous to the way a greenhouse retains heat. Prominent GHGs that naturally occur in the Earth’s atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), oxides of nitrogen (NO X ), and ozone. Anthropogenic (human-caused) GHG emissions include releases of these GHGs plus release of human-made gases with high global warming potential (GWP) (ozone-depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs] and aerosols, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 ). Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a very large one, does not generate enough GHG emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. Therefore, this section discusses the proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative GHG impact. Would the project: a)Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less than significant. Both construction and operational activities have the potential to generate GHG emissions. The proposed project would generate GHG emissions during temporary (short-term) construction activities such as demolition and grading, running of construction equipment engines, movement of on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, hauling materials to and from the project site, asphalt paving, and construction worker, vendor, and haul truck motor vehicle trips. 57 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 71 Long-term, operational GHG emissions would result from project-generated vehicular traffic, operation of any landscaping equipment, off-site generation of electrical power over the life of the proposed project, the energy required to convey water to and wastewater from the project site, and the emissions associated with the hauling, and disposal of solid waste from the project site. Construction Impacts The proposed project would emit GHG emissions during construction from the off-road equipment, worker vehicles, and any hauling that may occur. The BAAQMD does not presently provide a construction GHG emission threshold but recommends that construction GHG emissions be quantified and disclosed. The BAAQMD also recommends that lead agencies (in this case, Contra Costa County) determine the level of significance of construction GHG emissions. Although neither the County nor the BAAQMD provides a construction-related GHG emission threshold, the Sacramento Metro Air Quality Management District (Sacramento Metro AQMD) has adopted 1,100 MT CO 2 e per year as a threshold for construction-related GHG emissions.58 Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, the Sacramento Metro AQMD construction threshold is used to evaluate the project’s construction-related emissions. The table below summarizes the proposed project’s GHG emissions during construction. Construction GHG Emissions Construction Phase MT CO 2 e per year Demolition 23 Site Preparation 3 Grading 6 Building Construction 2023 254 Building Construction 2024 41 Paving 8 Architectural Coating 2 Total Construction Emissions 337 Construction Thresholds1 1,100 Exceed Threshold? No Notes: MT CO 2 e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Totals may not add up due to rounding. 1 Construction-related threshold was obtained from SMAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines. Source: CalEEMod Output, FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. As shown in the table above, the proposed project is expected to emit approximately 337 MT CO 2 e during construction, resulting in approximately 306 MT CO 2 e per year (337 divided by 1.1 years). Because the annual average and the total construction emissions would be less than the applied 58 Sacramento Metro Air Quality Management District (Sacramento Metro AQMD). 2020. SMAQMD Thresholds of Significance Table. Website: https://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/CH2ThresholdsTable4-2020.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. threshold of significance, the project’s construction-related GHG impacts would be less than significant. Operational Impacts The County adopted its Climate Action Plan (CAP) on December 15, 2015. The CAP is designed to demonstrate consistency with 2020 GHG reduction targets presented by AB 32. In addition, the CAP forecasts the potential GHG emissions and estimated GHG reductions from proposed measures through 2035.59 The CAP is a qualified GHG reduction strategy and based on communication with the County Department of Conservation and Development, the CAP is appropriate to use to determine whether the proposed project could generate significant GHG emissions.60 However, since the CAP was adopted in 2015, SB 32 was adopted in 2017, which requires GHG emissions be reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030. As stated on the County CAP website, the County is currently in the process of updating their CAP and expects it to be completed in late 2023. As a result, a “substantial progress” efficiency threshold was calculated by FCS based on the GHG reduction goals of SB 32/Executive Order B-30-15 to demonstrate consistency with SB 32. To determine significance for the GHG impacts, the proposed project’s GHG emissions are assessed against the following thresholds: 4.8 MT CO 2 e/service population/year for the 2024 operational year and 3.4 MT CO 2 e/service population/year 61 for the 2030 operational year. To determine the efficiency thresholds, first FCS determined the 2024 and 2030 CAP reduction target. As shown in Table 3.8 of the Contra Costa County CAP, the County set a 2020 reduction target of 1,193,070 MT CO 2 e and in 2035 of 596,540 MT CO 2 e. To determine the 2024 and 2030 reduction targets, FCS calculated the yearly GHG reductions that the County would need to make to reach their 2035 calculated reduction target of 596,540 MT CO2 e. 62 This calculation showed that the County would need to reduce annual GHG emissions by 36,939 MT CO 2 e per year.63 By 2024, after 4 years of projected reduction at a rate of 36,939 MT CO 2 e, the County would need to emit no more than 1,045,314 MT CO 2 e and by 2030 after 10 years of reductions, the County would need to emit no more than 751,133 MT CO 2 e to meet SB 32 goals of GHG emissions 40 percent below the 1990 levels.64 Next, the County’s GHG reduction target of 1,045,314 MT CO 2 e in 2024 and 751,133 MT CO 2 e in 2030 is divided by the estimated 2024 and 2030 unincorporated County service population. According to the County CAP Table 3.4, in 2024 unincorporated County would have 168,072 residents and 48,378 jobs and 173,500 residents and 50,330 jobs in 2030. As a result, the 2024 efficiency threshold of 4.8 MT CO 2 e/service population/year and 2030 efficiency threshold of 3.4 MT CO 2 e/service population/year demonstrates the necessary County per capita GHG emissions needed to be consistent with SB 32 GHG reduction goals. The proposed project would contribute to global climate change through direct and indirect emissions of GHG from mobile sources (e.g., passenger vehicles, trucks), energy (e.g., purchased electricity), water use and wastewater generation, and solid waste generation. All modeling 59 Contra Costa County. 2015. Climate Action Plan. December 15. 60 Contra Costa County. Joseph Lawlor Jr. Personal Communication, email. November 7, 2022. 61 Calculation: 751,130 MT CO2e/223,830 service population of unincorporated Contra Costa County = 3.36 MT CO2e/service population/year 62 Contra Costa County. 2015 Climate Action Plan, Table 3.8 Baseline GHG Emissions, Forecasts and Reduction Goals. 63 Calculation: (626,630 MT CO2e – 72,550 MT CO2e)/15 years = 36,939 MT CO2e per year. Source: Table 3.8 Baseline GHG Emissions, Forecasts and Reduction Goals. 64 Calculation: [Year 2024] 1,193,070 MT CO2e – (36,939 MT CO2e per year x 4 years) = 1,045,314 MT CO2e 1,193,070 MT CO2e – (36,939 MT CO2e per year x 10 years) = 751,133 MT CO2e 73 parameters utilized in the Air Quality analysis are also utilized for this GHG analysis, including but not limited to trip generation rates, trip distances, building sizes and operations, energy consumption, water consumption, and waste generation65. Operational GHG emissions by source are shown in the table below. The proposed project was analyzed assuming full buildout in the year 2024, immediately following the construction period. Operational GHG Emissions Emission Source Year 2024 Total Emissions Year 2030 Total Emissions MT CO 2 e per year1 (biogenic CO 2 are not included) Area 0.5 0.5 Energy2 28 28 Mobile (Vehicles) 70 59 Waste 3 3 Water 2 2 Total Project Emissions 104 93 Service Population3 28 28 SB 32 Efficiency Threshold 4.8 MT CO 2 e/service population/year 3.4 MT CO 2 e/service population/year Project Emission Generation (MT CO 2 e/service population/year) 3.73 3.35 Exceeds Threshold? No No Notes: MT CO 2 e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 1 Emission totals may not sum exactly due to rounding. 2 The proposed project would adopt an all-electric design and would not include natural gas use. However, natural gas use is included in CalEEMod to provide a conservative estimate of air quality and GHG emissions. 3 As discussed in Section 2.14, Population and Housing, the California Department of Finance (CDF) states the average persons per household in the County is 2.84. Therefore, it can be assumed that the proposed project would result in an increase of approximately 28 residents. 4 Calculation: 104 MT CO 2 e per year/28 residents = 3.7 MT CO 2 e/service population/year. The 104 MT CO 2 e excludes biogenic CO 2 based on BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. 5 Calculation: 93 MT CO 2 e per year/28 residents = 3.3 MT CO 2 e/service population/year. The 93 MT CO 2 e excludes biogenic CO 2 based on BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. Source: CalEEMod Output, FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. As shown in the table above, the proposed project would result in operational GHG Emissions of 104 MT CO 2 e in 2024 and 93 MT CO 2 e in 2030, which when divided by the service population of 28 residents, would result in 3.7 MT CO 2 e/service population/year in 2024 and 3.3 MT CO 2 e/service population/year in 2030. Consequently, the proposed project would not exceed the efficiency thresholds and demonstrates that the proposed project would contribute to meeting the County’s CAP GHG reduction targets and SB 32 GHG emission reduction goals. Therefore, the proposed 65 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and energy Supporting Information Report. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. project would not generate significant amounts of GHG emissions, and impacts would be less than significant. b)Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less than significant impact. The following discusses project consistency with applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, which include ARB’s Scoping Plan and County CAP. Senate Bill 32 2017 Scoping Plan Update The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update addressing the SB 32 targets was adopted on December 14, 2017. The table below provides an analysis of the proposed project’s consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update measures. As shown in the table below, many of the measures are not applicable to the proposed project, and the proposed project is consistent with strategies that are applicable. Consistency with SB 2017 Scoping Plan Update 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency SB 350: 50 Percent Renewable Mandate. Utilities subject to the legislation will be required to increase their renewable energy mix from 33 percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030. Not applicable. This measure would apply to utilities and not to individual development projects. The proposed project would purchase electricity from PG&E, which would be subject to the SB 350 Renewable Mandate. SB 350 Double Building Energy Efficiency by 2030. This is equivalent to a 20 percent reduction from 2014 building energy usage compared to current projected 2030 levels. Not applicable. This measure applies to existing buildings. New structures are required to comply with Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards that are expected to increase in stringency over time. The proposed project would comply with the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards in effect at the time building permits are submitted. Low Carbon Fuel Standard. This measure requires fuel providers to meet an 18 percent reduction in carbon content by 2030. Not applicable. This is a statewide measure that cannot be implemented by a project applicant or lead agency. However, vehicles used by future residents at the project site would benefit from the standards. Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels Scenario). Vehicle manufacturers will be required to meet existing regulations mandated by the LEV III and Heavy-Duty Vehicle programs. The strategy includes a goal of having 4.2 million Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) on the road by 2030 and increasing numbers of ZEV trucks and buses. Not applicable. This measure is not applicable to the proposed project; however, vehicles accessing the project site would benefit from the increased availability of cleaner technology and fuels. In addition, as stipulated by the 2022 California Building Code, Title 24, Part 11, Chapter 4, Section 4.106.4.1, new one- family dwellings, such as the proposed project, would be required to implement the applicable provisions of Title 24, Part 6, Section 4.106.4 of the California Building Code to support future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Sustainable Freight Action Plan. The plan’s target is to improve freight system efficiency 25 percent by increasing the value of goods and services Not applicable. The proposed project is residential in nature and would not have any major freight vehicles operational. 75 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency produced from the freight sector, relative to the amount of carbon that it produces by 2030. This would be achieved by deploying over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment capable of zero emission operation and maximize near-zero emission freight vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030. Short-lived Climate Pollutant (SLCP) Reduction Strategy. The strategy requires the reduction of SLCPs by 40 percent from 2013 levels by 2030 and the reduction of black carbon by 50 percent from 2013 levels by 2030. Consistent. Consistent with BAAQMD Regulation 6, Rule 3, no wood-burning devices are proposed as part of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not include major sources of black carbon. SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies. Requires Regional Transportation Plans to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy for reduction of per capita VMT. Not applicable. The proposed project does not include the development of a Regional Transportation Plan. Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program. The Post 2020 Cap-and-Trade Program continues the existing program for another 10 years. The Cap-and-Trade Program applies to large industrial sources such as power plants, refineries, and cement manufacturers. Not applicable. The proposed project is not one targeted by the cap-and-trade system regulations, and, therefore, this measure does not apply to the proposed project. However, the post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program indirectly affects people and entities who use the products and services produced by the regulated industrial sources when increased cost of products or services (such as electricity and fuel) are transferred to the consumers. Natural and Working Lands Action Plan. The ARB is working in coordination with several other agencies at the federal, State, and local levels, stakeholders, and with the public, to develop measures as outlined in the Scoping Plan Update and the governor’s Executive Order B-30-15 to reduce GHG emissions and to cultivate net carbon sequestration potential for California’s natural and working land. Not applicable. The proposed project is in a built-up urban area and would not be considered natural or working lands. Source of ARB 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measures: California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November. As shown in the table above, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with the reduction measures proposed in SB 32. Contra Costa County Climate Action Plan As described previously, the CAP was adopted on December 15, 2015, and is designed to demonstrate consistency with 2020 GHG reduction targets presented by AB 32. In addition, the CAP forecasts the potential GHG emissions and estimated GHG reductions from proposed measures through 2035.66 The County’s CAP is structured around the following six topic areas: energy 66 Contra Costa County. 2015. Climate Action Plan. December 15. efficiency and conservation, renewable energy, land use and transportation, solid waste, water conservation, and government operations. The proposed project incorporates several design elements that would reduce GHG emissions, such as conformance to the most recent Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen building regulations, installation of rooftop solar PV system, installation of one EV charging raceway in each garage, highly efficient lighting, and the use of low VOC content architectural coating at 30 grams per liter. Although this worksheet would not be required, the County could require the project include the worksheet to further demonstrate consistency with the CAP because the worksheet is required only on a case-by-case basis.67 The proposed project would be consistent with the measures in the CAP, as identified in the table below. Contra Costa County CAP Consistency Applicable Goals Measures Consistency Analysis Energy Efficiency and Conservation Increase energy efficiency in residential and commercial building stock, and reduce community- wide electricity and natural gas use. EE-1: Provide opportunities for residential buildings to become more energy efficient. Consistent. The proposed project would comply with the California Building Code and the most recent adopted version of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. This would improve energy efficiency in the proposed residential homes compared to existing conditions. In addition, the proposed project would include landscaping and storm retention areas with native vegetation, which would reduce the urban heat island effect. Furthermore, the proposed project would be designed as all-electric and would not include natural gas as a source of heating or cooking appliances. EE-4: Reduce urban heat islands through vegetation management and cool surfaces. Renewable Energy Increase the production of renewable energy from small-scale and commercial-scale renewable energy installations. RE-1: Promote installation of alternative energy facilities on homes and businesses Consistent. The proposed project would install a PV rooftop solar system in accordance with the requirements contained in Title 24 of the California Building Code, which would increase renewable energy production compared to existing conditions. Land Use and Transportation Reduce transportation emissions. LUT-1: Maintain and expand access to goods, services, and other destinations through increased transportation alternatives (mobility improvements) and improved proximity (land use improvements). Consistent. The proposed project would include a private garage as part of each home, which would provide secure parking to store bicycles. In addition, the new private street would maintain bicycle access to Grayson Road. These roadway improvements would not prohibit alternative transportation use. LUT-4: Reduce vehicle miles traveled. Consistent. The proposed project site is served by the County Connection bus route #16 and #18, which have stops located 0.6 miles from the 67 Contra Costa County. 2015. Climate Action Plan, Page E-1. December 15. 77 Applicable Goals Measures Consistency Analysis proposed project site and stops at the Pleasant Hill BART Station. Therefore, the proposed project would be located near existing transit routes that could reduce project resident VMT. Waste Reduction and Recycling Increase recycling and composting in the commercial sector. W-1: Develop a waste reduction strategy to increase recycling and reuse of materials. Consistent. The proposed project site is served by Republic Services for solid waste management, which provides solid waste collection and disposal of residential and commercial solid waste. Republic Services would be required to implement recycling and waste reduction measures as part of service of the proposed project. Water Conservation Conserve water. WE-1: Reduce water demand. Consistent. The proposed project would be constructed in conformance with CALGreen and the Title 24 Building Code, which requires high- efficiency water fixtures and water-efficient irrigation systems. In addition, the proposed project would include landscaping composed of native plant species that would reduce water demand compared to traditional landscaping. Source: Contra Costa County. 2015. December 15. Climate Action Plan. Website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/8681/2015-Climate-Action-Plan. Accessed June 6, 2023. As shown in the table above, the proposed project’s design features, such as rooftop solar PV systems and EV charging raceways, would ensure the proposed project would be consistent with the goals and strategies contained in the CAP. The proposed project would adopt an all-electric design, consistent with County Ordinance 2022-02. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an adopted GHG reduction plan and impacts would be less than significant. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 9.Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c)Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d)Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e)For a project located within an airport land 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f)Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g)Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? Environmental Evaluation The analysis in this section is based on the Government Records Report prepared by Envirosite Corporation for the proposed project, generated on September 23, 2022. Setting Envirosite Corporation prepared a Government Records Report for the site in accordance with EPA AAI (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 312) requirements and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) wE-1527-21 Environmental Site Assessments standard. The report indicates no environmental points of concern on the project site. A number of Hazardous Waste Information System (HAZNET) listings were identified within 0.25 mile of the project site. These listings appear to be associated with private residences and asbestos waste. An unpermitted solid waste facility/landfill (SWF/LF) is located approximately 0.40 mile northwest of the project site and is 79 the nearest potential point of environmental concern. However, based on the distance between the SWF/L F and the project site, the difference in elevation, and the information available about the SWF/LF site, the facility does not pose an environmental risk to the project site. Would the project: a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than significant impact. The proposed project consists of the construction of 10 single-family homes. Construction activities would require the routine use of substances such as solvents, paints, fuel, and other potentially hazardous substances. These materials are commonly used during construction activities and would be used in limited quantities. Heavy construction equipment such as dozers, excavators, and tractors would likely require the use of petroleum-based substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if improperly stored or handled. These activities are standard activities at most construction sites, and the risks associated with the proposed project would be similar to the risks associated with other similar construction sites. The handling, use, and storage of hazardous materials is regulated by numerous agencies, including the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), Caltrans, California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), in addition to applicable local regulations. All construction projects must comply with the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act administered by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) and implemented in California by Caltrans, as well as the applicable State Water Board NPDES Construction General Permit requirements. Substances that may be used during project operation include cleaning agents, building maintenance chemicals, and pesticides and herbicides used for landscaping and maintenance. The amount of materials required for these activities would not be large enough to create a significant hazard to the public or environment. Although the proposed project would operate as single-family residences with no significant use of heavy chemicals or pollutants, the transport, use, and disposal of these operational substances is controlled and regulated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); and the federal Clean Air Act. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Compliance with the applicable local, State, and federal standards, policies, and regulations would help ensure that the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would not create a significant hazard. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant. b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than significant impact. During project construction activities, there is always a limited risk of the accidental release of hazardous materials such as gasoline, oil, or fluids from construction equipment. However, use of these materials would be conducted in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, policies, and ordinances set forth by the EPA, State Water Board, DTSC, Cal/OSHA, Caltrans, RCRA, and Contra Costa Environmental Health Department. These include, but are not limited to, California Health and Safety Code Sections 25270.7, 25270.8, and 25507, California Vehicle Code Section 23112.5, California Public Utilities Code Section 7673 (PUC General Orders #22-B, 161), California Government Code Sections 51018 and 8670.25.5(a), California Water Code Sections 13271 and 13272, California Labor Code Section 6409.1(b)10, and NPDES Construction General Permit requirements. Compliance with the provisions of these regulations would help minimize the risk of accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment and that appropriate remediation measures are implemented in the event of an accidental release. As such, impacts related to the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than significant impact. The nearest school to the project site is Walnut Heights Elementary school, located approximately 0.16 mile east of the site. While construction of the proposed project could emit hazardous emissions, these emissions would be temporary and the project applicant is required to comply with all safe transport, handling, and disposal requirements and regulations. Operation of the proposed single-family homes would be similar to existing residential uses surrounding the site, and not result in the emission or handling of large quantities of hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Therefore, there would be less than significant impacts related to the possibility of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of a school. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No impact. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 68 and therefore would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. As such, no impacts would occur. e) For a project located within an airport land 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No impact. The nearest airport to the project site is project site is the Buchanan Field Airport, located over six miles northwest of the project site. The project site is outside of the area affected by federal aviation regulations and the airport influence area and is therefore not subject to the noise and safety regulations pursuant to the Buchanan Field Airport Master Plan.69 Therefore, the 68 Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Envirostor. 2021 Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. Website: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?page=1&cmd=search&business_name=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&c ounty=&status=ACT%2CBKLG%2CCOM&branch=&site_type=CSITES%2COPEN%2CFUDS%2CCLOSE&npl=&funding=&reporttitle=HAZ ARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST&reporttype=CORTESE&federal_superfund=&state_response=&voluntary_cleanup= &school_cleanup=&operating=&post_closure=&non_operating=&corrective_action=&tiered_permit=&evaluation=&spec_prog=&n ational_priority_list=&senate=&congress=&assembly=&critical_pol=&business_type=&case_type=&searchtype=&hwmp_site_type= &cleanup_type=&ocieerp=&hwmp=False&permitted=&pc_permitted=&inspections=&inspectionsother=&complaints=&censustract =&cesdecile=&school_district=&orderby=upper%28business_name%29. Accessed June 6, 2023. 69 Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Commission. 2000. Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Website:https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/851/Cover-Introduction-and-County-wide-Policies?bidId=. Accessed June 6, 2023. 81 proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within an airport influence area or within 2 miles of a public or public use airport and no impacts would occur. f)Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than significant impact. The proposed project consists of the construction of 10 single-family homes on a site zoned for residential development. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant population increase in the County, and would not significantly affect travel along Walnut Boulevard, Yg nacio Valley Road, or other major evacuation routes. 70 g)Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? Less than significant impact. The project site is located within an urbanized and residential area of the County that has not experienced wildfire. According to topographic data available from Google Earth, the site slopes down generally from northeast to southwest, from an elevation of 232 feet (WGS84) down to a minimum of 192 feet. The project site and surrounding area, including the City of Walnut Creek, is located in a Local Responsibility area in a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ).71 Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to adhere to all applicable requirements and regulations related to fire safety, including the California Fire Code and CBC. As such, the proposed project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. As such, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None required. 70 Contra Costa County. 2015. Emergency Operations Plan. Website: https://www.cocosheriff.org/home/showpublisheddocument/168/637284267426930000. Accessed June 6, 2023. 71 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2009. Contra Costa County: Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA as Recommended by CAL FIRE. Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 10.Hydrology and Water Quality Would the project: a)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? b)Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: (i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; (iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or (iv) impede or redirect flood flows? d)In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Environmental Evaluation The analysis in this section is based on the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses and Stormwater Control Plan prepared by dk Engineering in March 2022. Setting The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay RWQCB, Region 2.72 The State Water Board regulates stormwater discharges under authorities of the federal Clean Water Act and California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The State Water Board issues National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for stormwater discharges, including those from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). The NPDES General Construction Permit 72 California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). 2022. State and Regional Water Boards. Website: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/. Accessed June 6, 2023. 83 applies to all construction activities that would disturb 1 acre of land or more. To comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, the project applicant must prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which identify BMPs that will be employed to prevent soil erosion and discharge of pollutants that could contaminate nearby water resources. The Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) is responsible for the County’s compliance with its NPDES permits. The CCCWP’s current NPDES permits are the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) for discharges to the San Francisco Bay and the East Contra Costa County Permit for discharges into the Delta. Contra Costa County Ordinance Title 10, Division 1014, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control, supports the CCCWPs authority in implementing the requirements of the County’s NPDES permits.73 Additionally, the CCCWP assists its member agencies, which consists of the County and 20 other local government agencies, to implement stormwater quality activities in compliance with State and federal requirements.74 The project site is located within the EBMUD service area. EBMUD provides potable water to approximately 1.4 million people in a 332-square-mile area, including unincorporated areas within Alameda and Contra Costa counties. The EBMUD's primary water source is the Mokelumne River, with approximately 90 percent of the water supply originating from the Mokelumne River watershed. The remaining 10 percent originates as runoff from the protected watershed lands in the East Bay Area.75 As detailed in Section 2.18, Utilities and Service Systems, EBMUD’s water supply is projected to meet demand during normal years and single dry years out to 2050. However, during multi-year droughts EBMUD would be required to obtain supplemental supplies to meet customer demands.76 The project site slopes down generally from northeast to southwest, from an elevation of 232 feet to a minimum of 192 feet, with some areas of the site containing slopes up to 50 percent. There is an existing drainage swale flowing along the northern and western boundary that collects runoff from a portion of the site and several neighboring parcels. The project proposes to drain runoff from each of the private lots to the proposed new private street where it would be conveyed to a bioretention basin located on Lot 10, a natural low point allowing for gravity flow of stormwater runoff. The bioretention basin would serve as a dual-purpose basin for both treatment and retention. Treated stormwater would then be directed to the existing storm drain system in Walnut Boulevard. The proposed storm drain system and bioretention basin would meet County requirements and would effectively accommodate the runoff that would be generated by the proposed project. 73 Contra Costa Public Works. 2022. Contra Costa County Watershed Program. Website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/344/Contra- Costa-County-Watershed-Program. June 6, 2023. 74 Contra Costa Clean Water Program. 2022. About Us. Website: https://www.cccleanwater.org/about. Accessed June 6, 2023. 75 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. Accessed June 6, 2023. 76 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2020. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. Accessed June 6. 2023. Would the project: a)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Less than significant impact. The proposed project has the potential to release water pollutants during both construction and operation. During grading and construction activities, runoff carrying eroded soil and pollutants could enter storm drainage systems, increasing sedimentation and degrading downstream water quality. However, because the proposed project disturbs more than one acre of land, under the NPDES General Construction Permit the preparation and implementation of SWPPP is required. The SWPPP would identify structural and nonstructural BMPs intended to prevent erosion during construction. Compliance with applicable policies and regulations would minimize the potential to degrade water quality in downstream water bodies to the maximum extent possible. As such, the proposed project’s construction-related impacts related to surface and groundwater quality would be less than significant. The proposed project consists of the subdivision of the existing site into 10 lots for the development of 10 single-family homes. Implementation of the proposed project would introduce 40,755 square feet of new impervious surface area as compared to existing conditions, which would increase the generation of runoff that could carry pollutants into waterways. As described in the Stormwater Control Plan, the proposed project would utilize disconnected impervious areas, such as permeable pavers for the project site’s driveways, and landscape features including bioretention to treat and manage stormwater. Furthermore, the stormwater runoff would flow through the storm drain system where it would be treated by a bioretention area before it connects with the existing storm drain system in Walnut Boulevard. C.3 is a provision in the MRP which requires permittees to use their planning authorities to include appropriate source control, site design, and stormwater treatment measures in new development and redevelopment projects to address pollutant discharges and prevent increases in runoff flows.77 The landscaped bioretention basin facility would be consistent with C.3 stormwater requirements and would be located on Lot 10. Furthermore, the proposed project would implement permanent source control BMPs such as landscaping designed to minimize irrigation and runoff and minimal use of fertilizers and pesticides that could contribute to polluted runoff. The proposed project would be required to comply with the NPDES program and all Ordinance Code requirements related to stormwater pollution, which would minimize the potential to degrade water quality in downstream water bodies to the maximum extent possible, the impacts to surface or groundwater quality would be less than significant. b)Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Less than significant impact. The project site is not located above an identified groundwater basin or subbasin within the San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Region.78 However, the EBMUD service area does 77 Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP). 2017. Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. Website: https://www.cccleanwater.org/userfiles/kcfinder/files/Stormwater_C3_Guidebook_7th_Edition_2017-05-12%281%29.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. 78 California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). 2016. Groundwater Basins and Subbasins within the San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Region. Website: 85 include the East Bay Plain Subbasin. In the event of an emergency or prolonged extreme drought conditions, EBMUD will supplement supply using local groundwater resources via its Bayside Groundwater Facility.79 As detailed in Section 2.18, Utilities and Service Systems, the proposed project would receive potable water from EBMUD via an existing domestic water line within Walnut Boulevard. EBMUD’s primary sources of water supply are the Mokelumne River and the East Bay Area watershed runoff. According to the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP), under base conditions assumptions EBMUD is projected to meet customer demand out to 2050 during normal years and single dry years. However, during multi-year droughts EBMUD would be required to obtain supplemental supplies to meet customer demands, as mentioned previously.80 EBMUD does not operate water wells in the vicinity of the project site. The Geotechnical Exploration performed for the project site did not observe static or perched groundwater in any subsurface exploration. Development of the proposed project would introduce a total of 40,755 square feet of new impervious surfaces on the project site. However, as detailed in the Stormwater Control Plan and the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses, the proposed bioretention basin would allow for treatment and percolation of water into the underlying soils, which would, in turn, contribute to groundwater recharge. The proposed project would also utilize pervious pavers for project site driveways and landscaping features on the project site. No groundwater extraction or utilization is included as a part of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge. c)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: (i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; Less than significant impact. Grading and site preparation for the proposed project would create new drainage patterns, including surface runoff being directed to the proposed bioretention basin in Lot 10 via the new private road, and eventually to the existing storm drain system in Walnut Boulevard. As discussed above in Impact 2.10(a), the project’s construction activities would be subject to compliance with NPDES requirements, including the General Construction Permit which requires implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would identify structural and nonstructural BMPs intended to prevent erosion during construction. Furthermore, the proposed bioretention catch basin and treatment device would reduce potential sediment from entering downstream waterways. Compliance with NPDES requirements and implementation of on-site treatment features would reduce impacts related to erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/groundwater/BasinLinks/Groundwater_Basins_Map_Tab le.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. 79 East Bay Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD). 2022. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water- supply/bayside-groundwater-project. Accessed June 6, 2023. 80 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2020. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. Accessed June 6. 2023. (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; Less than significant impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL), the proposed project is located in Zone X, an area of minimal flood hazard.81 Furthermore, the Geotechnical Exploration noted that the project site is located outside of the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain and the General Plan does not identify the project site as being within a 100 Year Floodplain.82,83 As previously discussed, implementation of the proposed project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces. However, the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses prepared for the proposed project concluded that, with the implementation of the detention/bioretention basin, post-development flows would not exceed pre-development flows, in compliance with C.3 requirements. Furthermore, as detailed in Table 1 Peak Flow Rates of the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses, peak flow rates for 10-year, 25-year and 100-year rainfall events under the post-development with retention scenario are lower than the pre-development peak flow rates. Additionally, if outlets are overwhelmed during a large rainfall event, runoff would release down the proposed new private street and into the catch basins in Walnut Boulevard, similar to the historical drainage pattern of the project site. As such, impacts would be less than significant. (iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; Less than significant impact. As mentioned above, the proposed project would not result in an increase in peak flow as compared to existing flow on-site. The proposed project would be served by existing stormwater drainage systems near the project site. Furthermore, the proposed project would install a bioretention basin on Lot 10, which would act as a dual-purpose basin for treatment and retention, reducing the likelihood of pollutants to be carried off-site. Treated stormwater runoff from the proposed bioretention device would be discharged into the existing public storm drain system in Walnut Boulevard. The selection, sizing, and preliminary design of stormwater treatment and other control measures detailed in the Stormwater Control Plan prepared for the proposed project meet the requirements of the MRP.84 As such, impacts would be less than significant. (iv) impede or redirect flood flows? Less than significant impact. The proposed project consists of the division of the existing site into 10 lots and the development of 10 single-family homes. The proposed project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the project site compared to existing conditions; however, a bioretention basin is proposed along the Walnut Boulevard frontage for stormwater treatment. As described previously, project site runoff would flow through the storm drain system where it would be treated by a bioretention area before it connects with the existing storm drain system in Walnut Boulevard. According to the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses, post-development flows would not exceed pre-development flows and if the outlets of the storm drain system are overwhelmed, runoff will release down the proposed new private street and into catch basins in Walnut Boulevard. As discussed above, the proposed project is located in an area of minimal flood hazard.85 Furthermore, 81 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2020. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette. Website: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=wlanut%20creek#searchresultsanchor. Accessed June 6, 2023. 82 ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO). 2020. Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration. March. 83 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Safety Element, Figure 10-8 Flood Hazard Areas. 84 dk Engineering. 2022. Stormwater Control Plan for 3180 Walnut Boulevard. June. 85 ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO). 2020. Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration. March. 87 the project site is not within the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain or a 100 Year Floodplain.86,87 Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d)In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the project site is located outside of the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain and therefore flooding is not expected at the project site. Additionally, the Geotechnical Exploration noted that, due to the topographic and lithographic features of the project site, the risk of tsunamis, flooding or seiches is considered low to negligible.88 According to General Plan Figure 10-8, Flood Hazard Areas, the project site is not located in an area identified as a 100 Year Flood Plain,89 and is located outside a tsunami hazard area.90 As such, impacts would be less than significant. e)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Less than significant impact. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act allows local water agencies to form a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) to develop, adopt and implement a groundwater sustainability plan.91 As discussed previously, EBMUD would provide water to the proposed project. EBMUD, along with the City of Hayward, lies atop the East Bay Plain (EBP) groundwater subbasin and both agencies are the GSAs for the section of the EBP subbasin beneath their respective service areas. EBMUD and the City of Hayward jointly prepared the East Bay Plain Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan in January 2022.92 As previously discussed, no groundwater extraction or utilization is included as a part of the proposed project. As such, the proposed project would not interfere with the implementation of any adopted water quality control plan. Furthermore, as discussed above, the proposed project would include a bioretention system that would ensure stormwater runoff would be controlled and directed to the municipal stormwater control systems or percolate into the groundwater basin for recharge. Therefore, based on the implementation of the BMPs discussed above, the incorporation of project-specific design features including a bioretention basin, and project compliance with NPDES permit requirements, project impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None required. 86 Ibid. 87 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Safety Element, Figure 10-8 Flood Hazard Areas. 88 ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO). 2020. Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration. March. 89 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Safety Element, Figure 10-8 Flood Hazard Areas. 90 California Department of Conservation. 2019. California Tsunami Maps and Data. Website: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps. Accessed June 6, 2023. 91 East Bay Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD). City of Hayward. 2022. East Bay Plain Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan, Executive Summary. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/groundwater-sustainability- agencies/east-bay-plain-subbasin-gsp-documents. Accessed June 6, 2023. 92 Ibid. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 11.Land Use and Planning Would the project: a)Physically divide an established community? b)Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Environmental Evaluation Setting The site is designated SL by the General Plan Land Use Element (Exhibit 3), and is zoned as R-20 according to the Zoning Map (Exhibit 4). The SL land use designation allows a for a range of 1.0 to 2.9 single-family units per net acre and the R-20 zoning designation allows for a detached single-family dwelling on each lot and the accessory structures and uses normally auxiliary to it. The project site is surrounded by existing residential development and is bounded by existing roadways Walnut Boulevard to the southwest and View Lane to the southeast. Would the project: a)Physically divide an established community? Less than significant impact. The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a physical feature, such as an interstate highway or railroad tracks, or removal of a means of access, such as a local road or bridge that would impair mobility within an existing community or between a community and outlying area. The proposed project does not propose the construction of such a feature. The project proposes to divide the existing lot into 10 lots for 10 single-family residential homes. Existing roadways Walnut Boulevard and View Lane would not be altered in a way that would reduce connectivity. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community and would improve connectivity within the community. As such, impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project consists of the division of the existing lot into 10 lots for 10 single-family residential homes, which would be consistent with the land use designation and zoning. As described above, the project applicant is seeking concessions under the Density Bonus Law, including waivers and reductions in development standards relating to minimum lot area and lot width, front yard and side yard setbacks, and retaining wall setbacks. Under California Government Code 65915(e)(1), the proposed project would not be subject to any development standard that would physically preclude the construction of housing unit densities afforded by the Density Bonus Law. Therefore, the proposed project’s alternative development standards outlined in Table Project Summary and Alternative Development Standards, would be considered for approval as part of the Density Bonus waivers. With approval of the proposed waivers, the proposed project would not conflict with the current zoning land use designation and impacts would be less than significant. 89 Mitigation Measures None required. b)Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the project site is zoned R-20 and its land use designation is SL. Primary land uses permitted in the SL designation include detached single-family homes and accessory buildings and structures. Secondary uses generally considered to be compatible with low density homes may be allowed, including home occupations, small residential care and childcare facilities, churches, and other similar places of worship, ADUs, and other uses and structures incidental to the primary uses. The R-20 zoning designation allows for a detached single- family dwelling on each lot and the accessory structures and uses normally auxiliary to it. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 12.Mineral Resources Would the project: a)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b)Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Environmental Evaluation Setting According to the General Plan, the mineral extraction industry is responsible for significant employment within the County. The most important mineral resources that are currently mined in the County include crushed rock, currently being extracted near Mount Zion, north of Mount Diablo.93 This regionally significant deposit of diabase—a volcanic rock—is located approximately 3.80 miles east of the project site.94 The Clayton Quarry, owned and operated by CEMEX, mines diabase from this deposit in the form of aggregates. The quarry operation is located at 515 Mitchel Canyon Road in Clayton, California approximately 4.70 miles east.95 Would the project: a)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? No impact. As discussed above, the project site does not contain any known mineral resources. The General Plan identifies significant mineral resource areas of diabase, clay, and domengine sandstone within the County. None of these mineral resource areas are in the vicinity of the project site. The nearest mineral resource area is a deposit of diabase approximately 3.80 miles east of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State. As such, no impact would occur. b)Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No impact. As discussed above, the project site does not currently support any mineral extraction activity and there are no regionally significant mineral deposits, as identified by the General Plan, in the vicinity of the project site. Furthermore, the project proposes to subdivide the project site into 10 lots for 10 single-family residential homes and would not support any mineral extraction activity. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the availability of a locally important mineral 93 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Conservation Element. 94 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Conservation Element, Figure 8-4 Mineral Resource Areas. 95 CEMEX. 2022. About Clayton Quarry. Website: cemexclaytonquarry.com/about-clayton-quarry/. Accessed June 6, 2023. 91 recovery site as delineated in a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures None required. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 13.Noise Would the project result in: a)Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b)Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c)For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land 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? Environmental Evaluation Setting This Noise Impact Analysis has been prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) generated on September 28, 2022. to determine the off-site and on-site noise impacts associated with the proposed project. Characteristics of Noise The standard unit of measurement of the loudness of sound is the decibel (dB). The 0 point on the dB scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Changes of 3 dB or less are only perceptible in laboratory environments. A change of 3 dB is the lowest change that can be perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. While a change of 5 dBA is considered to be the minimum readily perceptible change to the human ear in outdoor environments. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, the A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) was derived to relate noise to the sensitivity of humans, it gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. The A-weighted sound level is the basis for a number of various sound level metrics, including the day/night sound level (L dn ) and the CNEL, both of which represent how humans are more sensitive to sound at night. In addition, the equivalent continuous sound level (L eq ) is the average sound energy of time-varying noise over a sample period and the L max is the maximum instantaneous noise level occurring over a sample period. 93 Regulatory Framework The project site is located within Contra Costa County. The County addresses noise in their General Plan 96 and Ordinance Code.97 Contra Costa County General Plan The Noise Element of the General Plan establishes the following noise policies that have relevance to the project. 98 Policy 11-1 New projects shall be required to meet acceptable exterior noise level standards as established in the Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines contained in Figure 11-6 [of the Noise Element]. These guidelines, along with the future noise levels shown in the future noise contours maps, should be used by the County as a guide for evaluating the compatibility of “noise-sensitive” projects in potentially noisy areas. Policy 11-2 The standard for outdoor noise levels in residential areas is an L dn of 60 dB. However, an L dn of 60 dB or less may not be achievable in all residential areas due to economic or aesthetic constraints. One example is small balconies associated with multi-family housing. In this case, second and third story balconies may be difficult to control to the goal. A common outdoor use area that meets the goal can be provided as an alternative. Policy 11-8 Construction activities shall be concentrated during the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. According to the County’s land use compatibility standards contained in Figure 11-6 of the Noise Element, ambient noise environments are considered normally acceptable for new single-family residential land use development with noise levels ranging up to 60 dBA CNEL/L dn . Environments with noise levels ranging from 55 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL/L dn are considered conditionally acceptable for new single-family land use development; and such development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Environments with noise levels from 70 dBA to 75 dBA CNEL/L dn are considered normally unacceptable for new single-family land use development, and clearly unacceptable for levels above 75 dBA CNEL/L dn . Contra Costa County Ordinance Code—Noise Ordinance It should be noted that the Ordinance Code does not contain any noise ordinance codes or performance standards that are applicable to the proposed project. Would the project result in: 96 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan, Noise Element. 97 Contra Costa County. 2022. Contra Costa Municipal Code, Title 8 Zoning. Website: https://library.municode.com/ca/contra_costa_county/codes/ordinance_code. Accessed on June 6, 2023. 98 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan, Noise Element. a)Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Short-Term Construction Impacts A significant impact would occur if construction activities would result in generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels which would result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. According to the policies of the General Plan, construction activities shall be concentrated during the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. Construction of the project is expected to require the use of scrapers, dozers, water trucks, haul trucks, and pickup trucks. The maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be 85 dBA L max at 50 feet from this equipment. Each dozer would also generate 85 dBA L max at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by graders is approximately 85 dBA L max at 50 feet. A characteristic of sound is that each doubling of sound sources with equal strength increases a sound level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance from the other equipment, a reasonable worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 90 dBA L max at a distance of 50 feet from the acoustic center of a construction area. The effect on sensitive receptors is evaluated below. The closest noise-sensitive receptors to the proposed project construction footprint are single-family residential properties that neighbor the project site to the immediate west and north. The calculated reasonable worst-case noise levels could result in hourly average noise levels of up to 83 dBA L eq , at the façade of the nearest receiving residential land use when equipment operate at the nearest project boundary for a full hour 99. However, these reasonable worst-case construction noise levels would occur only periodically throughout the day as construction equipment operate along the nearest project boundaries. However, these noise levels would drop off at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance as the equipment moves over the project site. Based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels, with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for residential developments would provide a minimum of 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed. During the calculated loudest phase of construction described above the interior noise levels of the nearest off-site residences would be reduced to below 60 dBA L eq (80 dBA – 52 dBA = 55 dBA), which would not be considered a substantial noise impact for daytime noise levels. The County restricts construction activities to the hours of the day that are not noise-sensitive for adjacent land uses and should be commissioned to occur during normal work hours of the day to provide relative quiet during the more sensitive evening and early morning periods. Therefore, 99 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Noise Impact Analysis. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 95 restricting construction activity to daytime hours, as well as implementing the best management noise reduction techniques and practices outlined in MM NOI-1, would ensure that construction noise would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels that would result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, with implementation of MM NOI-1, temporary construction noise impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Operational/Stationary Source Noise Impacts Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if operational noise levels generated by stationary noise sources at the proposed project site would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of established standards. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. A change of 5 dBA is considered the minimum readily perceptible change to the human ear in outdoor environments. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, an increase of 5 dBA or greater above ambient noise levels or in excess of existing conditions would be considered a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. The only identified new stationary noise source associate with implementation of the proposed project is new mechanical ventilation system operations for the proposed residential uses. Mechanical Equipment Operations At the time of this analysis, details were not available pertaining to proposed ground-floor mechanical ventilation systems for the proposed project; therefore, a reference noise level for typical mechanical ventilation systems was used. Noise levels from typical residential mechanical ventilation equipment range from 60 dBA to 70 dBA L eq at a distance of approximately 3 feet. The nearest sensitive receptor to potential mechanical ventilation system locations is the single- family residence located west of the project site. The façade of this receptor could be located as close as 70 feet from the nearest proposed mechanical ventilation system. At this distance, noise generated by proposed mechanical ventilation equipment would attenuate to 39 dBA L eq . If proposed mechanical ventilation systems operated for a 24-hour period, the resulting noise level as measured at these nearest receptors would be 45 dBA CNEL.100 Two noise measurement surveys were taken to determine existing noise levels at the project site. The dominant noise source in the project vicinity was found to be traffic noise on adjacent roadways and lawnmowing. Documented existing ambient noise levels on the project site measured 48 dBA L eq at approximately 6 feet off View Lane; and measured 62 dBA L eq directly opposite of 3175 Walnut Boulevard at approximately 15 feet from the edge of the roadway 101. Therefore, the calculated reasonable worst-case operational noise levels from proposed mechanical ventilation equipment operations would not exceed these existing measured ambient noise levels in the project area, and would therefore not result in a substantial permanent increase in noise levels in excess of established standards. Therefore, the impact of mechanical ventilation equipment operational noise levels on off-site sensitive receptors would be less than significant. 100 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Noise Impact Analysis. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. 101 FirstCarbon Solutions. 2022. Noise Impact Analysis. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Contra Costa County, California. Operational/Mobile Source Noise Impacts Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in traffic noise levels compared with traffic noise levels existing without the project. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. A change of 5 dBA is considered the minimum readily perceptible change to the human ear in outdoor environments. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, an increase of 5 dBA or greater above existing noise levels would be considered a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels. Another characteristic of noise is that a doubling of sound sources with equal strength is required to result in a perceptible increase (defined to be a 3 dBA or greater) in noise levels. Generally, a doubling of traffic volumes is required to increase traffic-related noise levels by 3 dBA. The proposed project would develop 10 single-family residences in a residential neighborhood consisting of hundreds of similar single-family residences. As such, the proposed project would not generate traffic volumes sufficient to double traffic volumes along Walnut Boulevard or any other surrounding roadway. As a result, the project would not result in even a 3 dBA increase in traffic noise levels along any roadway segment in the project vicinity, and any increase would be well below the 5 dBA increase that would be considered substantial. Therefore, impacts from project-related traffic noise levels would not result in a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels in excess of applicable standards, and the impact would be less than significant. b)Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if the project would generate groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels in excess of established standards. The County has not adopted criteria for groundborne vibration impacts. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) vibration impact criteria are utilized. The FTA has established industry accepted standards for vibration impact criteria and impact assessment. These guidelines are published in its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.102 Groundborne noise is an effect of groundborne vibration and only exists indoors, since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room, and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves. In general, if groundborne vibration levels do not exceed levels considered to be perceptible, then groundborne noise levels would not be perceptible in most interior environments. Therefore, this analysis focuses on determining exceedances of groundborne vibration levels. Although groundborne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects such as the shaking of a building can be notable. When assessing annoyance from groundborne vibration, vibration is typically expressed as root mean square (rms) velocity in units of decibels of 1 microinch per second. To distinguish these vibration levels referenced in decibels from noise levels referenced in decibels, the unit is written as “VdB.” 102 Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September. Website: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact- assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed on June 6, 2023. 97 In extreme cases, excessive groundborne vibration has the potential to cause structural damage to buildings. Common sources of groundborne vibration include construction activities such as blasting, pile driving and operating heavy earthmoving equipment. However, construction vibration impacts on building structures are generally assessed in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV). For purposes of this analysis, project-related impacts are expressed in terms of PPV. Short-term Construction Vibration Impacts Of the variety of equipment that would be used during construction, large vibratory rollers (that would be used in the construction of the internal roadway) would produce the greatest groundborne vibration levels. Impact equipment such as pile drivers is not expected to be used during construction of this project. Large vibratory rollers produce groundborne vibration levels ranging up to 0.201 inch per second (in/sec) PPV at 25 feet from the operating equipment. The nearest off-site structure to the project site construction footprint where such heavy equipment would operate is the residence located north of the project site. This nearest off-site structure would be located approximately 70 feet from the nearest construction footprint where the heaviest construction equipment would potentially operate. At this distance, groundborne vibration levels would range up to 0.04 in/sec PPV from operation of the types of equipment that would produce the highest vibration levels. This is well below the FTA’s Construction Vibration Impact Criteria of 0.2 in/sec PPV for this type of structure, a building of non-engineered timber and masonry. Therefore, project construction would not result in excessive groundborne vibration levels and this impact would be less than significant. Operational Vibration Impacts The project would not include any permanent noise sources that would expose persons in the project vicinity to groundborne vibration levels that could be perceptible without instruments at any receiving land use in the project vicinity. Therefore, operational vibration impacts on proposed on- site receptors would be less than significant. c)For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land 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? Less than significant impact. The nearest airport to the project site is the Buchanan Field Airport, which is located approximately 6 miles north of the project site. Because of its distance from the airport runways, the project site is located outside of the airport’s 55 dBA CNEL noise contours. No private airstrips are located within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, implementation of the project would not expose persons residing or working in the project site to excessive noise levels associated with private airstrip or public airport noise. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures MM NOI-1 The following Mitigation Measure shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans: a.The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. b.The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. c.The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. d.At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. e.The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. f.Unless specifically approved otherwise by the CDD, all construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and are prohibited on 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) Juneteenth National Independence Holiday (Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day (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: http://www.opm.gov/Operating_Status_Schedules/fedhol/2015.asp California: http://www.ftb.ca.gov/aboutFTB/holidays.shtml g.Transportation of large trucks and heavy equipment is subject to the same restrictions that are imposed on construction activities, except that the hours are limited to 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM. 99 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 14.Population and Housing Would the project: a)Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b)Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Environmental Evaluation Setting According to the California Department of Finance (CDF) the estimated population of Contra Costa County was approximately 1,156,555 persons as of January 2022.103 Would the project: a)Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than significant impact. The proposed project consists of the division of the existing site into 10 lots and the construction of 10 single-family homes. According to the CDF, the average persons per household in the County is 2.84;104 therefore, it can be assumed that the proposed project would result in an increase of approximately 28 new residents. As the site is already zoned for residential use, the development of the proposed project would result in growth that was already envisioned and evaluated as part of the General Plan, and would represent an increase of less than 0.003 percent of the County’s total population as of January 2022.105 According to CDF projections, the County’s population is expected to increase to 1,197,341 in 2025 and 1,312,526 in 2040.106 Furthermore, the General Plan Housing Element, adopted in 2014, projects a 6 percent increase in 103 California Department of Finance (CDF). 2022. E-4 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2022. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/Demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and- the-state-2020-2022/. Accessed June 6, 2023. 104 California Department of Finance (CDF). 2022. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and State 2020-2022. Website: https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fdof.ca.gov%2Fwp- content%2Fuploads%2FForecasting%2FDemographics%2FDocuments%2FE-5_2022_InternetVersion.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK. Accessed June 6, 2023. 105 (28/1,156,555) * 100 = 0.00242 106 California Department of Finance (CDF). 2022. Projections. P-1: State Population Projections (2010-2060). Website: https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fdof.ca.gov%2Fwp- content%2Fuploads%2FForecasting%2FDemographics%2FDocuments%2FP2A_County_Total.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK. Accessed June 6, 2023. population from 159,785 to 169,000 within unincorporated areas between 2010 and 2030.107 As such, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth and a less than significant impact would occur. b)Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No impact. The project site contains one vacant single-family residence. The proposed project would demolish the existing residence in order to subdivide the site into 10 lots for the development of 10 single-family residential homes. Because the existing single-family residence is vacant, the proposed project would not displace existing people or housing and would provide additional housing opportunities. As such, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures None required. 107 Contra Costa County. 2014. Contra Costa County Housing Element. 101 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 15.Public Services 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: a)Fire protection? b)Police protection? c)Schools? d)Parks? e)Other public facilities? Environmental Evaluation Setting Fire The project site is located within, and would receive fire protection services from, the CCCFPD. The CCCFPD operates out of 25 fire stations with 27 companies and over 400 employees. In 2018, CCCFPD responded to nearly 75,000 fire and emergency medical service calls with an average response time of 5:35 minutes in central Contra Costa County.108 The fire station nearest the project site is Station 1 located at 1330 Civic Drive, Walnut Creek, approximately 1.10 miles northwest of the project site.109 Police The proposed project is located in unincorporated Contra Costa County and would receive police services from the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff.110 The Office of the Sheriff is the largest law enforcement agency in the County, providing police services to over 1,000,000 residents in the County, including unincorporated areas.111 The Office of the Sheriff patrol division operates out of four station houses and includes the Blackhawk Police Department, K-9 Unit, Watch Commander, and SWAT 112 Valley Station, located at 150 Alamo Plaza #C in Alamo, California, is the nearest station approximately 2.93 miles south of the project site. The Valley Station service area includes the area from Canyon (an unincorporated community west of the Town of Moraga and east of the City of Piedmont) through the City of Walnut Creek near the border of Brentwood and all unincorporated areas to the southern Contra Costa County/Alameda County border. The Valley Station consists of 27 108 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). 2018. Annual Report 2018. Website: https://cccfpd.org/2018-annual-report/. Accessed October 30, 2022. 109 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). 2022. Station Addresses. Website: https://cccfpd.org/station-address/. Accessed October 30, 2022. 110 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Public Facilities/Services Element. 111 Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff. 2022. Office of the Sheriff Overview. Website: https://www.cocosheriff.org/about- us/office-of-the-sheriff-overview. Accessed October 27, 2022. 112 Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff. 2022. Patrol Division. Website: https://www.cocosheriff.org/bureaus/field- operations/patrol-division. Accessed October 27, 2022. sworn staff members including one Lieutenant, five Sergeants, 16 Beat Deputies and five special district Deputies.113 Schools There are 18 school districts and one community college district in the County.114 The project site is located within the Walnut Creek School District (WCSD) and the Acalanes Union High School District (AUHSD).115 The project site is located within the enrollment boundary of Walnut Heights Elementary school, located approximately 0.16 mile east of the project site and within the WCSD.116 The project site is also within the enrollment boundary of Las Lomas High School, located approximately 0.68 mile southwest of the project site and within the AUHSD.117 Parks As discussed in Section 16, Recreation, Lar Rieu Park is located approximately 0.09 mile west of the project site and Howe Homestead Park is located approximately 0.36 mile north of the project site. Shell Ridge Open Space, Diablo Foothills Regional Park, and Mount Diablo State Park are also in the vicinity of the project site. Shell Ridge Open Space is located approximately 0.19 mile to the northeast, Diablo Foothills Regional Park is located approximately 2.12 miles east, and Mount Diablo State Park is located approximately 2.78 miles to the east. Library Facilities Library services would be provided by the County Library System. The County Library System consists of 26 community libraries serving 351,658 library card holders.118 The branch nearest the project site is the Walnut Creek Library, located approximately 1 mile northwest of the project site. The library features a large children’s wing and garden, a Teen Zone, a Business and Career Center, a Technology Center, a 16-seat Las Trampas conference room, and four group study rooms.119 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: a)Fire protection? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the CCCFPD would provide fire protection and emergency medical services to the project site. The proposed project may increase the need for fire protection service at the project site with an increase in up to 28 new residents. The nearest station 113 Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff. 2022. Valley Station. Website: https://www.cocosheriff.org/bureaus/field- operations/patrol-division/valley-station. Accessed June 6, 2023. 114 Contra Costa County Office of Education. County School Districts. Website: https://www.cccoe.k12.ca.us/district_resources/county_school_districts. Accessed June 6, 2023. 115 City of Walnut Creek. 2066. Walnut Creek General Plan 2025, Chapter 2 Quality of Life, Figure 4 School District Boundaries within Planning Area. 116 Walnut Creek School District (WCSD). 2022. WCSD School Boundaries. Website: https://www.walnutcreeksd.org/Page/45. Accessed June 6, 2023. 117 Acalanes Union High School District (AUHSD). 2022. Schoolsite Locator. Website: https://portal.schoolsitelocator.com/apps/ssl/?districtcode=12031#. Accessed June 6, 2023. 118 Contra Costa County Library. 2022. Newsroom. Website: https://ccclib.org/newsroom/#annual-reports. Accessed June 6, 2023. 119 Contra Costa County Library. 2022. About Walnut Creek Library. Website: https://ccclib.org/about-walnut-creek-library/. Accessed June 6, 2023. 103 is approximately 1.10 miles away, allowing for efficient response time to the site in the event of an emergency. Furthermore, the County has adopted the California Fire Code (Ordinance Code Division 722) and the County Fire Marshall would review the proposed project for compliance with the adopted Fire Code and policies related to fire protection. General Plan Goal 7-Y states that upgrades to facilities and staff are regularly reviewed for the CCCFPD to achieve the General Plan’s target response time of 5 minutes and General Plan Implementation Measure 10-au states that major development will not be approved if firefighting services are not available or are not adequate for the area. The proposed project would be reviewed by the County Fire Marshall for compliance with Title 7, Division 722 of the Ordinance Code, also known as the County’s Fire Code, and would be required to pay the applicable fire facilities fees required by the CCCFPD Ordinance 2021-18. Lastly, the Code of Ordinances Section 818-2.6 states that within unincorporated areas within fire protection service areas where fire facilities are overextended, fire protection facilities fees shall be collected prior to the issuance of building permits for any new development. Compliance with the County Fire Code, applicable General Plan policies and payment of appropriate fees would ensure that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on fire protection services. b)Police protection? Less than significant impact. The proposed project is anticipated to result in an increase of 28 individuals to the County’s population and would result in an increase in demand for police protection services. The County Sheriff’s Office would provide police protection services to the proposed project. Valley Station, the nearest station to the project site, is located approximately 2.93 miles south. Based on a driving distance of 4.6 miles, the response time for law enforcement responding to the project site from the Valley Station traveling at an average speed of 35 miles per hour would be 7 minutes, 52 seconds, falling short of the General Plan’s target response time of 5 minutes. General Plan Policy 7-57 indicates a Sheriff facility standard of 155 square feet of Sheriff station space per 1,000 persons of population. To maintain this standard, the project applicant would be required to pay applicable fees to the County Office of the Sheriff to help provide for costs associated with a police facility building and equipment to serve additional demands for police services. Furthermore, General Plan Implementation Measure 7-ar states that public protection facilities need will be included in the 5-year Capital Improvements Program to ensure that the facilities will be available as development proceeds. With the payment of applicable fees, the proposed project would be incompliance with applicable General Plan policies supporting the adequacy of police protection, and would have a less than significant impact on police protection facilities. c)Schools? Less than significant impact. The project site is located within the WCSD and the AUHSD. As discussed previously, the proposed project is estimated to result in an increase to the population of 28 persons. According to the United States Census Bureau’s 2021 population estimates, approximately 22.2 percent of the population is under the age of 18.120 Therefore, the proposed project is anticipated to result in approximately six people under the age of 18,121 with a corresponding increase in demand for school services. Walnut Heights Elementary school, located approximately 0.16 mile east of the project site, is a K-5 public elementary school within the WCSD. As of 2021, this school has an enrollment of 400 students.122 Las Lomas High School, located approximately 0.68 mile southwest of the project site, is a public 9-12 high school within the AUHSD. As of 2021, this school has an enrollment of 1,580 students.123 The increase in persons under the age of 18 generated by the proposed project would represent 1.5 percent and 0.38 percent of each school’s current enrollment,124 respectively. The WCSD collects Developer Fees for new construction to offset costs associated with providing school facilities and services to students within the district. Fees for residential development are set as $2.86 per square foot, and credit is given for existing area that is torn down for new construction.125 The proposed project involves demolishing the existing single-family residence present on the project site. The AUHSD also collects Developers Fees, which are currently set at $4.08 per square foot for residential construction. An agreement between AUHSD, WCSD, Moraga School District, Orinda School District, and Lafayette School District will split the residential fees and commercial fees at 30 percent for the high school district and 70 percent for the elementary school districts.126 Therefore, with the payment of the applicable Developer Fees, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on school facilities. d)Parks? Less than significant impact. The proposed project is anticipated to result in an increase to the County population of 28 individuals, which would increase demand for parks. As discussed above and in Section 16, Recreation, the nearest park is Lar Rieu Park, located approximately 0.09 mile west of the project site, and the next nearest park is Howe Homestead Park located approximately 0.36 mile to the north. Shell Ridge Open Space is located approximately 0.19 mile to the east, Diablo Foothills Regional Park is located approximately 2.12 miles east, and Mount Diablo State Park is located approximately 2.78 miles to the east. While the proposed project would result in an increase in demand for parks and park services, the proposed project would be required to pay park dedication and park impact fees per the County Department of Conservation and Development. Payment of in lieu park dedication fees may be applied as credit toward park impact fees. With the payment of required impact and in lieu park 120 United States Census Bureau. 2021. QuickFacts Contra Costa County, California. Website: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/contracostacountycalifornia. Accessed June 6, 2023. 121 0.222*28 = 6.21 122 California School Dashboard. 2022. Walnut Heights Elementary. Website: https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/07618126005243/2021. Accessed June 6, 2023. 123 California School Dashboard. 2022. Las Lomas High. Website: https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/07616300733725/2021. Accessed June 6, 2023. 124 (6/400)*100 = 1.5%, (6/1,580)*100 = 0.379% 125 Walnut Creek School District (WCSD). 2022. WCSD Developer Fee Information. Website: https://www.walnutcreeksd.org/Page/103. Accessed June 6, 2023. 126 Acalanes Union High School District (AUHSD). 2020. Annual Accounting of Developer Fees for the 2019-2020 Fiscal Year. Website: https://www.acalanes.k12.ca.us/cms/lib/CA01001364/Centricity/Domain/638/2019- 2020%20Annual%20Developer%20Fees%20Report.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. 105 dedication fees, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on existing neighborhood and regional parks. e)Library facilities? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the County Library System provides library services to the County and the project site. The nearest library branch to the project site is Walnut Creek Library, located approximately 1 mile northwest of the project site. The proposed project would result in approximately 28 additional County residents and would increase demand for library services. The increase of 28 individuals would represent approximately 0.008 percent of the County Library System’s 351,658 current cardholders. Therefore, the increase in library users as a result of the proposed project would be negligible. Furthermore, Goal 1, Objective D of the County Library Strategic Plan aims to increase the number of active users in the library system by 10 percent annually, which given the current number of cardholders would be an increase of approximately 35,165 users. Therefore, the increase of potential users from the proposed project’s 28 new residents is consistent with demand already anticipated by the County Library, and potential impacts on other public facilities would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None required. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 16.Recreation a)Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b)Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Environmental Evaluation Setting Major park facilities in the County are owned by the federal and State governments, along with an extensive system owned and operated by the EBRPD and water district watershed recreation facilities.127 As previously discussed in Section 1, Aesthetics, the proposed project is located in the vicinity of Shell Ridge Open Space, Diablo Foothills Regional Park, and Mount Diablo State Park, all of which are identified by the General Plan as major parks and open space areas. Shell Ridge Open Space is 0.19 mile east of the project site. Diablo Foothills Regional Park and Mount Diablo State Park are located more than 2 miles from the project site. The General Plan Open Space Element Table 9-1, County Park Criteria, identifies a service standard of 2.50 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks and 1.50 acres per 1,000 population for community parks. General Plan Goal 9-K is to achieve a level of park facilities of 4 acres per 1,000 population. This is equivalent to a level of park facilities of 0.004 acres per person. As detailed previously, the County’s current population is estimated at 1,156,555 people. A population of this size would require approximately 4,626 acres of parks to meet the goal specified in the General Plan. Shell Ridge Open Space, Diablo Foothills Regional Park and Mount Diablo State Park alone account for over 22,480 acres of parkland.128 Therefore, the County currently meets its goal of 4 acres of park land per 1,000 people. a)Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than significant impact. As discussed in Section 2.14, Population and Housing, the CDF states the average persons per household in the County is 2.84.129 Therefore, it can be assumed that the 127 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Open Space Element. 128 1,420 + 1,060 + 20,000 = 22,480 129 California Department of Finance (CDF). 2022. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and State 2020-2022. 107 proposed project would result in an increase of approximately 28 residents, which could increase demand for existing neighborhood and regional parks in the vicinity of the proposed project. The project applicant would be required to pay the required park dedication and park impact fees per the County Department of Conservation and Development. Park fees are collected to fund the acquisition and development of parks in the County to serve unincorporated County residents. All residential projects are required to pay a park impact fee, and residential projects requiring a development plan or subdivision may also require dedication of parkland or in lieu fees.130 As the proposed project includes a subdivision of the existing project site into 10 lots and the development of 10 single-family residences, the project applicant would be required to pay the appropriate in lieu park dedication fees. Payment of in lieu park dedication fees may be applied as credit toward park impact fees. With the payment of required impact and in lieu fees, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. b)Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the proposed project would subdivide the existing project site into 10 lots for the development of 10 single-family homes. The proposed project does not include the development of recreational facilities. Based on the County’s persons per household figures, the proposed project would increase the population by approximately 28 individuals. This increase in population would increase the demand for recreational facilities. The nearest park is Lar Rieu Park, within the City of Walnut Creek, approximately 0.09 mile west of the project site and Shell Ridge Open Space lies approximately 0.19 mile to the east. As discussed previously, the proposed project would be subject to park impact fees and parkland dedication or in lieu fees to the County. With the payment of required fees, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on recreational facilities. Mitigation Measures None required. Website: https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fdof.ca.gov%2Fwp- content%2Fuploads%2FForecasting%2FDemographics%2FDocuments%2FE-5_2022_InternetVersion.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK. Accessed December 16, 2022. 130 Department of Conservation and Development. 2022. Park Dedication and Park Impact Fees. Website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/42080/Park-Fees-Overview-PDF. Accessed October 20, 2022. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 17.Transportation Would the project: a)Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b)Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c)Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d)Result in inadequate emergency access? Environmental Evaluation Setting Walnut Boulevard runs northwest to southeast along the western boundary of the project site. Walnut Boulevard is a two -lane street with a posted speed of 25 miles per hour (mph) between Homestead Avenue and Mountain View Boulevard.131 Large portions of Walnut Boulevard in the vicinity of the project site cannot accommodate street parking. From the intersection of Walnut Boulevard and View Lane to the intersection of Walnut Boulevard and Homestead Avenue, approximately 0.50 mile northwest of the project site, the east side of the street does not feature sidewalks. From roughly where the western-most boundary of the project site meets Walnut Boulevard to the intersection of Walnut Boulevard and Homestead Avenue, the west side of the street does not feature sidewalks. Walnut Boulevard intersects with Ygnacio Valley Road approximately 1.09 mile northwest of the project site. Ygnacio Valley Road is a six-lane, northeast-southwest street with posted speeds between 30 mph and 55 mph and is a main arterial road in the City of Walnut Creek.132 According to 511 Contra Costa, a County-wide transportation program administered by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA), neither Ygnacio Valley Road nor Walnut Boulevard feature bike lanes.133 Regional access to the site is provided via I-680 by way of Ygnacio Valley Road. I-680 connects to State Route (SR) 24, SR-4, and SR-242. Would the project: 131 City of Walnut Creek. 2022. Walnut Creek Posted Speed Limits. Website: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1IHDguHOz5bHloyzvAF23RwTyp8lVn2vv&ll=37.899378772539066%2C- 122.0379594&z=13. Accessed June 6, 2023. 132 Ibid. 133 511 Contra Costa. 2022. 511CC’s Bike Mapper. Website: https://bike.511contracosta.org/#. Accessed June 6, 2023. 109 a)Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less than significant impact. Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the General Plan requires a traffic impact analysis of any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips.134 The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimates a daily trip rate of 9.43 trips per dwelling unit, thus the proposed project’s 10 single-family homes would be expected to generate 94 daily trips. The ITE estimates AM peak-hour trip generation rate of 0.70 trips per dwelling unit, and PM peak-hour trip generation rate of 0.94 trips per dwelling unit.135 The proposed project would develop 10 single-family residences, resulting in 7 AM peak-hour trips and 9 PM peak- hour trips. Therefore, the proposed project would generate less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, and a project-specific traffic impact analysis is not required. The proposed project is not anticipated to conflict with the circulation system in the project vicinity. The Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the County Board of Supervisors on July 12, 2016, requires Complete Streets infrastructure sufficient to enable reasonably safe travel along and across the right- of-way for each category of users be incorporated into all planning, funding, design, approval, and implementation processes for any construction, reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, operations, alteration, or repair of streets (including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions of the transportation system).136 The proposed project would construct a new private street. The new private street would be approximately 28 feet wide, with an 8-foot parking lane on one side and a 5-foot sidewalk along the southeast section of the proposed roadway, as is required by the CCCFPD standards. Furthermore, the proposed project would include approximately 0.16 acre of public roadway dedication along Walnut Boulevard. Other frontage improvements would consist of approximately 927 square feet of sidewalk improvements. Because the proposed project would provide sidewalk and parking on the proposed private street and implement 0.16 acre of public roadway dedication and 927 square feet of sidewalk improvements, the proposed project would comply with the Complete Streets Policy. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b)Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less than significant impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) establishes criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts. VMT is the metric for measuring transportation impacts. The County adopted Transportation Analysis Guidelines in 2020 that provide technical assistance, thresholds of significance and mitigation measures for land development projects.137 According to County guidelines, small projects can be presumed to cause a less than significant VMT impact. The County defines small projects as those proposing 20 residential units or 134 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Growth Management Element. 135 Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition. Volume 3. Single-Family Detached Housing. 136 Contra Costa County. 2016. Complete Streets Policy of Contra Costa County. 137 Contra Costa County Conservation and Development Department. Public Works Department 2020. Contra Costa County Transportation Analysis Guidelines. VMT Screening Criteria. June 23. less .138 The project proposes 10 single-family residential units which is under the County guidelines VMT screening criteria threshold. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant. c)Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than significant impact. The centerline of the proposed private street would be located approximately 135 feet west of the existing View Lane, which bounds the project site to the east, and 447 feet to the west of Fraser Drive. Both View Lane and Fraser Drive do not have through connections, and only serve the single-family homes located directly on them. The proposed private street would be of similar character. Walnut Boulevard has a 25 mph speed limit. The ITE recommends that, for streets with a 35 mph speed limit, there be an intersection separation of over 150 feet. However, because posted speed limits are less than 35 mph, this recommendation does not apply. As previously noted, the proposed new private street would meet the CCCFPD standards. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact due to design features or incompatible uses. d)Result in inadequate emergency access? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the proposed new private street would be approximately 28-feet-wide as required by the CCCFPD standards. As described in Section 15 Public Services, the project site is in near existing Sheriff and Fire stations. Furthermore, the CCCFPD would review project plans prior to project approval to ensure that adequate emergency access to the proposed buildings would be adequate. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None required. 138 Ibid. 111 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 19.Utilities and Service Systems Would the project: a)Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c)Result in a determination by the wastewater 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? d)Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e)Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Environmental Evaluation Setting The proposed project would obtain water from the EBMUD. The proposed project’s wastewater would be collected by sewer lines owned and maintained by Central San and treated at Central San’s Treatment Plant in Martinez, California. Stormwater runoff from the project site would be collected in the proposed bioretention basin in Lot 10 before being released to existing stormwater drains in Walnut Boulevard. Solid waste service would be provided by Republic Service and electric power and natural gas would be provided to the project site by PG&E. Would the project: a)Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than significant impact. The proposed project’s impact on water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, electricity, and natural gas is analyzed below. Water As described above, the project site is within the service area of EBMUD. The proposed project would connect to an existing EBMUD domestic water line within Walnut Boulevard. EBMUD obtains its water from the Mokelumne River and East Bay Area watershed runoff. The Mokelumne Aqueducts convey the Mokelumne River supply from Pardee Reservoir, located upstream of Camanche Dam, across the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Delta) to local storage and treatment facilities in the East Bay. After treatment, water is distributed to the incorporated cities and unincorporated communities in Alameda and Contra Costa counties that EBMUD serves.139 EBMUD adopted their 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) in June of 2021. Average annual water demand is forecasted to be 186 million gallons per day (mgd) in 2025 and 218 mgd in 2050. Specifically, average annual water demand for single-family residential use is forecasted to be 117 mgd in 2025 and 129 mgd in 2050.140 According to 2020 WSCP, under base conditions assumptions EBMUD is projected to meet customer demand out to 2050 during normal years and single dry years. However, during multi-year droughts EBMUD would be required to obtain supplemental supplies to meet customer demands. EBMUD is contracted to receive water from the Central Valley Project in years when EBMUD’s water supplies are relatively low.141 The proposed project is zoned R-20 according to the Zoning Map and designated as SL by the General Plan. As the proposed project is consistent with this land use designation and zoning, the proposed project would be considered planned growth that was accounted for in the 2020 UWMP and 2020 WSCP. As previously noted, the proposed project is anticipated to result in an additional 28 residents, which represents approximately 0.002 percent of EBMUD’s service population.142 Therefore, the proposed project would not increase demand such that it would result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities. As such, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on water services. Wastewater As described above, wastewater from the project site would be collected and treated by Central San. The proposed project would connect to an existing Central San 8-inch sewer line within Walnut Boulevard. Central San’s Sewer System Management (SSMP) plan was approved on October 6, 2022. According to the SSMP, Central San provides sanitary sewer service to approximately 487,300 customers and 3,000 businesses in the central Contra Costa County area. Central San operates 1,500 miles of collection system piping as well as Central San’s Treatment Plant which processes an average daily flow of 34 million gallons of wastewater.143 The plant has a treatment capacity of 54 mgd and 240 mgd of wet weather flow. This facility is staffed 24 hours a day, 265 days per year.144 According to Central San’s most recent Comprehensive Wastewater Master Plan (CWMP), completed in 2017, Central San’s Collection System has sufficient capacity for existing and future dry weather 139 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. Accessed June 6, 2023. 140 Ibid. 141 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2020. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. Accessed June 6. 2023. 142 (28/1,400,00)*100 = 0.002 143 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2022. Sewer System Management Plan. Website: https://www.centralsan.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/2020_ssmp_approved_audit_06.05.2020.pdf?1665594125. Accessed June 66, 2023. 144 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2022. Treatment Plant. Website: https://www.centralsan.org/treatment-plant. Accessed June 6, 2023. 113 flows, including peak daily flows, and the capacity of the 10 largest pumping stations is adequate for the peak wet weather flow of a 10-year design event, with the exception of one pumping station which may require expansion when projected future flows are realized. A 10-year sewer system event would have a 1 in 10 chance of occurring each year.145 Central San’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes wet weather capacity improvements to 12 areas throughout the Central San service area within the next 10 years and an additional eight areas within the next 10 to 20 years. The CWMP concluded that no improvements were needed for existing pipelines to accommodate planned growth in the service area.146 As discussed previously, the proposed project would not result in a significant population increase necessitating new or expanded facilities. Central San would also review project building plans to determine the availability of public sewers in the area to serve the proposed project, as well as the plumbing for a proposed connection and whether the proposed project would encroach into existing public easements of conflict with Central San facilities.147 Furthermore, the applicant would be required to pay a one-time Capacity Fee to ensure wastewater infrastructure capacity remains adequate for existing and future development. Central San also imposes an annual Sewer Service Charge on each property connected to its sewer system.148 With payment of the appropriate fees and Central San’s review of the proposed projects building plans, impacts would be less than significant. Stormwater As discussed in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, implementation of the proposed project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces on the project site and thus an increase in runoff. Stormwater runoff will flow through the storm drain system where it will be treated by a bioretention area before it connects with the existing storm drain system in Walnut Boulevard. The landscaped bioretention basin facility would be consistent with C.3 stormwater requirements. C.3 is a provision in the MRP which requires permittees to use their planning authorities to include appropriate source control, site design, and stormwater treatment measures in new development and redevelopment projects to address pollutant discharges and prevent increases in runoff flows. With implementation of the proposed wastewater collection and treatment features, impacts would be less than significant. Electricity and Natural Gas According to County Ordinance 2022-02, all building permits issued on or after June 1, 2022, for new construction of residential, retail, commercial, office and hotel buildings are required to be all-electric.149 The proposed project would comply with this ordinance. As noted above, the project site would be serviced by PG&E for electricity and gas services. The proposed project would connect to existing electric lines. No off-site construction of utilities would be required. The process of connecting the project to existing infrastructure is expected to be standard for conveying electrical power to new 145 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2017. Comprehensive Wastewater Master Plan, Technical Executive Summary. Website: https://www.centralsan.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/cwmp_technical_executive_summary.pdf?1510867241. Accessed June 6, 2023. 146 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2017. Comprehensive Wastewater Master Plan, Executive Summary. Website: https://www.centralsan.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/cwmp_executive_summary.pdf?1510867154. Accessed June 6, 2023. 147 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2022. New Connections. Website: https://www.centralsan.org/post/new- connections. Accessed June 6, 2023. 148 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2022. Frequently Asked Questions. Website: https://www.centralsan.org/permit-faqs. Accessed June 6, 2023. 149 Contra Costa County. 2022. All-Electric Building Ordinance. Website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/8536/All--Electric-Building- Ordinance. Accessed June 6, 2023. development. Construction of the proposed project would comply with County-approved BMPs for utilities infrastructure improvements and applicable construction-related mitigation measures identified in this IS/MND (e.g., air quality emissions and noise). As such, impacts related to the relocation or construction of new or expanded electric power or natural gas facilities would be less than significant. b)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, average annual water demand is forecasted to be 186 mgd in 2025 and 218 mgd in 2050. Specifically, average annual water demand for single-family residential use is forecasted to be 117 mgd in 2025 and 129 mgd in 2050. The 2020 WSCP forecasts that EBMUD would have adequate water supplies to meet customer demand out to 2050 during normal years and single dry years and would receive water from the Central Valley Project during multiple dry years. Average annual water demand for single-family residential use is forecasted to be 117 mgd in 2025 and 129 mgd in 2050. EBMUD’s 2020 target for daily per capita water use for residential indoor uses is 55 gallons per capita per day (gpcd).150 Based on this target rate, the proposed project is anticipated to result in an estimated 1,540 gallons per day of water demand, or 0.00154 mgd.151 This represents approximately 0.0012 percent of EBMUD’s 2050 forecasted single-family residential water demand of 129 mgd.152 Therefore, the proposed project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years and impacts would be less than significant. c)Result in a determination by the wastewater 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? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the proposed project would receive wastewater collection and treatment services from Central San and would connect to an existing 8-inch sewer line within Walnut Boulevard. The proposed project is expected to produce approximately 0.0012 mgd of wastewater, which represents approximately 0.0022 percent of Central San’s 54 mgd treatment capacity.153 The CWMP concluded that no improvements were needed for existing pipelines to accommodate planned growth in the service area. Central San would also review project building plans to determine the availability of public sewers in the area to serve the proposed project. Furthermore, the applicant would be required to pay a one-time Capacity Fee to ensure wastewater infrastructure capacity remains adequate for existing and future development. Central San also imposes an annual Sewer Service Charge on each property connected to its sewer system. Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant impact on wastewater treatment providers. 150 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. Website: https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. Accessed June 6, 2023. 151 (55*28) = 1,540 gpd, (1,540/1,000,000) = 0.00154 mgd 152 (0.00154/129) = 0.00001194, (0.00001194*100) = ~0.0012 153 (0.0012/54) = 0.0000222, (0.0000222*100) = 0.0022 115 d)Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than significant impact. Significant impacts could occur if the proposed project would exceed the existing permitted landfill capacity or violates federal, State, and local statutes and regulations. The proposed project consists of the development of 10 single-family homes. As described above, Republic Services is the solid waste services provider for the project site. Solid waste picked up by Republic Services is taken to their Martinez Transfer Station to be compacted before it is transported to Keller Canyon Landfill in Pittsburg, CA.154 According to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the Keller Canyon Landfill has a maximum permitted throughput of 3,500 tons of solid waste per day and a remaining capacity of 63,408,140 cubic yards as of November 16, 2004. The Keller Canyon Landfill is projected to cease operations on December 31, 2050.155 According to CalRecycle’s estimated solid generation rates by sector, single-family homes generate between approximately 7.8 and 12.23 pounds per dwelling unit per day of solid waste.156 As such, the proposed project would generate between 78 and 122.3 pounds, or 0.039 to 0.06115 tons per day. This is less than 0.002 percent of the daily permitted throughput of 3,500 tons at Keller Canyon Landfill. As such, solid waste produced by the proposed project would have a negligible impact on the landfill’s total remaining capacity as well as daily permitted throughput, and there would be sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project’s solid waste needs. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e)Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less than significant impact. AB 939 requires local jurisdictions to achieve at least a 50 percent solid waste diversion rate. The County’s Department of Conservation and Development Solid Waste and Recycling aims to implement AB 939 through the County Integrated Waste Management Plan. Per Chapter 418-6 of the Ordinance Code, it would be the responsibility of the owner of each premises in the unincorporated area of the County to subscribe and pay for solid waste collection service, or to dispose of on-site solid waste in accordance with Chapter 418-2 of the Ordinance Code. Therefore, it would be up to the occupant to comply with local regulations related to solid waste. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None required. 154 Republic Services. 2021. Unincorporated Contra Costa 2021 Residential Services Guide. Website: https://www.republicservices.com/cms/documents/municipality/ca/contra-costa-county/CCC-2021_Cust_Guide_BLUE.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2023. 155 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details. Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4407?siteID=228. Accessed June 6, 2023. 156 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecyle). 2019. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates. Accessed June 6, 2023. Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 20.Wildfire If located in or near State Responsibility Areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a)Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b)Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c)Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d)Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Environmental Evaluation Setting According to the CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer, the project site is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and is not classified as a very high fire hazards severity zone. The proposed project is not within the State Responsibility Area (SRA). The nearest fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ) within an SRA is 1.80 miles southeast of the project site and is classified as a moderate FHSZ. The nearest VHFHSZ is approximately 3.96 miles southeast of the project site.157 The General Plan does not identify the project site as a fire hazard zone.158 If located in or near State Responsibility Areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a)Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the proposed project is not located within an SRA or a VHFHSZ. However, the nearest FHSZ is located 1.80 miles southeast of the project site. The County adopted an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) in 2015. The purpose of the EOP is to provide the basis for a coordinated response before, during and after an emergency affecting the 157 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2022. FHSZ Viewer. Website: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessed June 6, 2023. 158 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Safety Element, Figure 10-10 Fire Hazard Areas. 117 County and applies to incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County.159 The proposed project would not interfere with the implementation of the EOP. Furthermore, access to the 10 single-family homes would be provided via a new private street off Walnut Boulevard that would be approximately 28 feet wide with an 8-foot parking lane on one side and a 5-foot sidewalk along the southeast side of the roadway as required by the CCCFPD standards. Additionally, Lot 4 of the proposed project would include an emergency vehicle access easement. As indicated in Section 15, Public Services, the proposed project would be adequately served by police and fire services. The proposed project would comply with General Plan Policy 7-64, which requires new development to pay fair share costs for new fire protection facilities and services. Measure 7-au also provides fire protection agencies the opportunity to review projects and submit conditions of approval for consideration to determine whether road widths, road grades and turnaround radii are adequate for emergency equipment, among other considerations.160 The CCCFPD has approved the proposed layout of the new private road and turnaround. For these reasons, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to emergency response or emergency evacuation. b)Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? Less than significant impact. As detailed previously, the proposed project is not within an SRA or a VHFHSZ. The General Plan identifies the project site as being in an area with slopes of less than 26 degrees. As discussed in Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the site slopes down generally from northeast to southwest, from an elevation of 232 feet (WGS84) down to a minimum of 192 feet and is not subject to significant landslide hazard. The BAAQMD monitoring stations provide wind speed data from several monitoring stations in the eastern zone of the San Francisco Bay Area. The station nearest the project site is located in Concord, CA approximately 2.88 miles northeast of the project site. The average monthly wind speed recorded at this monitoring location in 2020 ranged from 7 mph to 16 mph.161 The next nearest monitoring station is located in San Ramon, approximately 11.92 miles south of the project site. This station includes wind speed data from multiple months in 2022. Average monthly wind speed data available from this station range from 0 to 14 mph.162 Therefore, the project site would not be exposed to high winds which could exacerbate wildfire risks. Furthermore, the proposed project is surrounded by existing roads and residential development which would reduce risks associated with wildfire. The proposed project would also be required to adhere to all applicable requirements and regulations related to fire safety, including the California Fire Code and CBC. Furthermore, General Plan Measure 7-au, as discussed above, allows fire protection agencies to review the proposed project and submit conditions of approval for 159 Contra Costa County. 2015. Contra Costa County Emergency Operations Plan. Website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/37349/Contra-Costa-Emergency-Operations-Plan-2015?bidId=. Accessed June 6, 2023. 160 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Public Facilities/Services Element. 161 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2020. Wind Speed. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air- quality/current-air-quality/air-monitoring-data/#/met?date=2020-10-19&id=203&view=monthly&style=chart. Accessed June 6, 2023. 162 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. Wind Speed. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air- quality/current-air-quality/air-monitoring-data/#/met?date=2022-10-19&id=203&view=monthly&style=chart. Accessed June 6, 2023. consideration to determine whether the proposed structures are built in compliance with the standards of the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Fire Code, other State regulations, and local ordinances regarding the use of fire-retardant materials and detection, warning and extinguishment devices.163 As noted above, the CCCFPD has approved the proposed turnaround and private road. Therefore, impacts related to exposure of project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of wildfire would be less than significant. c)Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Less than significant impact. The proposed project is not within an SRA or a VHFHSZ. The proposed project would include the development of a new private road which would provide access to the project site from Walnut Boulevard. As previously discussed, this new road would be approximately 28-feet-wide with an 8-foot parking lane on one side and a 5-foot sidewalk along the southeast section and would comply with CCCFPD standards. Electric and natural gas utilities would be provided by PG&E and new connections to the project site would be undergrounded, minimizing potential impacts to fire risk. Furthermore, the proposed project would not require emergency water sources as the project site would be served by an existing EBMUD domestic water line within Walnut Boulevard. Thus, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to the exacerbation of wildfire risk by the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure. d)Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Less than significant impact. The proposed project is not within an SRA or a VHFHSZ. Though some areas of the project site have slopes of up to 50 percent,164 the majority of the area located within and near Walnut Creek is not subject to significant landslide hazards, including the project site.165 Furthermore, the project site is located in a developed area and is surrounded by existing roads and residential development. As previously discussed, the Shell Ridge Open Space, which contains topographic features such as slopes and ridges, lies approximately 0.19 mile to the northeast of the project site. Therefore, impacts related downslope flooding or landslides would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None required. 163 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Public Facilities/Services Element. 164 dk Engineering. 2022. 3180 Walnut Boulevard Hydrologic & Hydraulic Analyses. June 23. 165 Contra Costa County. 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan. Safety Element, Figure 10-6, Geological (Landslide) Hazards. 119 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 21.Mandatory Findings of Significance a)Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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 individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c)Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Environmental Evaluation a)Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially 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? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. The proposed project would demolish existing structures on the project site and construct 10 single-family residences. As described previously in Section 4, Biological Resources, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to wildlife or plant species with mitigation incorporated. The analysis provides mitigation to prevent erosion control and to protect riparian habitat, nesting birds and raptors, special-status bats, Alameda whipsnake, mixed woodland, and trees within the site. These measures include pre- construction surveys potentially followed by impact avoidance measures, preparation of a tree replacement plan, and implementation of tree preservation guidelines. Additionally, the proposed project includes mitigation and avoidance measure to reduce construction-related impacts to unidentified cultural materials and the accidental discovery of human remains. Mitigation to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources include paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Based on the discussion provided above, with implementation of the listed mitigation measures, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare of endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with implementation of MM BIO-1 through MM BIO-8, MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, and MM GEO-2. b)Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. The combined effects of any past, current, and future projects in the project area in combination with the proposed project would not result in significant cumulative impacts. The project is proposed in an area that is mostly developed and there are no planned or proposed developments in the immediate site vicinity that could contribute to cumulative environmental items discussed below. The proposed project could result in potentially significant impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, paleontological resources, and noise. These impacts would primarily be related to construction period activities, would be temporary in nature, and would not substantially contribute to any potential cumulative impacts associated with these topics. Specifically, since the proposed project would not exceed BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance related to air quality, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of construction emissions (with implementation of MM AIR-1 and MM AIR-2), operational emissions, or TACs. As discussed in Section 8 of this IS/MND, GHG emissions-related impacts are inherently cumulative in nature. The proposed project also would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. As such, the proposed plan, in conjunction with other existing, planned, and probable foreseeable projects, would not result in a significant cumulative impact related to GHG emissions generation. Therefore, with implementation of the foregoing mitigation measures, the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts at a project- or cumulative-level. c)Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Based on the information provided in the Project Description and the responses to Sections 1 through 19 of this IS/MND, the proposed project would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, because the project’s potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. With implementation of all mitigation measures discussed herein, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. 121 Mitigation Measures Implement MM AES-1, MM AIR-1, MM AIR-2, MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2, MM BIO-3, MM BIO-4, MM BIO-5, MM BIO-6, MM BIO-7, MM BIO-8, MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, MM GEO-1, MM GEO-2, and MM NOI-1. REFERENCES References used in the process of preparing the Initial Study Checklist and conduction of the evaluation are stated in the footnotes throughout this Initial Study and available for review at the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Rd., Martinez, CA 94553. AT TACHMENTS 1.Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map 2.Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity Map 3.Exhibit 3: Land Use Map 4.Exhibit 4: Zoning Map 5.Exhibit 5: Vesting Tentative Map 6.Exhibit 6: Site Plan 7.Exhibit 7a: Architectural Elevations 1 8.Exhibit 7b: Architectural Elevations 2 9.Exhibit 7c: Architectural Elevations 3 10.Exhibit 8: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) ! ·|}þ12 12 ·|}þ29 121 ·|}þ37 ·|}þ4 ·|}þ4Na p a CountyS o n omaCountyC o n tra C o s ta C o u n ty A la m e d a C o u n ty !"#$80 !"#$580 ·|}þ92 !"#$680 !"#$80 !"#$680 C o n traCosta County !"#$780 MontezumaS l o u ghCarquinezStr a it Sherm an Lake Mount DiabloState Park Blackhawk ·|}þ242 Richmond Berkeley Lafayette Walnut Creek Concord Clayton Danville Diablo San Ramon Mountain ViewHercules Martinez Bay Point Pittsburg Antioch Collinsville Molena Emeryville San Francisco OaklandAlameda Castro Valley Pleasant Hill Pleasanton Dublin Fairview San Leandro Bay FarmIsland Hayward Benicia Bahia Cygnus Rio VistaJunctionCordelia Russell Alamo N a p a River Exhibit 1Regional Location Map5052.5 Miles ! Text Project Site Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL). I Project Site Legend City of Pleasant Hill 57880002 • 01/2023 | 1_regional.mxd CONTRA COSTA COUNTYWALNUT BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL PROJECTINITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Exhibit 2Local Vicinity Map Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery. Wa l n u t B l v d View LnNo b H i l l D r Si m p s o n D r Fraser DrS hady Gle n R d E l CaminoCortoSan M i g u e l D r ScotsLnOak Knoll Loop Walnut Blvd I 510 0 510255 Feet Legend Project Site SanMiguelDr Eckley L nWalnut BlvdView LnDrainage Swale Drainage Swale Exhibit 3Land Use Map Source: ESRI Aerial Im agery. Contra Costa County. City of W alnut Creek. City of Walnut Creek City of Walnut Creek UnincorporatedContra Costa County I 400 0 400200 Feet Legend Project Site Land Use OS/R: Open Space - Recreation PU: Public/Semi Public SL: Single-Family Residential - Low Density SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL OS/R OS/R PU Source: ESRI Aerial Im agery. Contra Costa County. City of Walnut Creek. City of Walnut Creek City of Walnut Creek UnincorporatedContra Costa County I 400 0 400200 Feet CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OS/R OS/R CFR-20 R-20 R-20 R-20 R-20 R-20 R-15 R-15 R-15 R-15 R-15 R-15 R-15 Exhibit 4Zoning Map Legend ZoningProject Site CF: Community Facility OS/R: Open Space/Recreation R-20: Single Family Residential (20,000) R-15: Single Family Residential (15,000) Source: DK Engineering, 12/19/2022. Exhibit 5 Vesting Tentative Map Source: DK Engineering, 12/19/2022. Exhibit 6 Site Plan Drainage Swale SIDEWALK AREA Exhibit 7a Architectural Elevations 1 Source: CALIBR Ventures. WHA. 12/17/2021 Exhibit 7b Architectural Elevations 2 Source: CALIBR Ventures. WHA. 12/17/2021 Exhibit 7c Architectural Elevations 3 Source: CALIBR Ventures. WHA. 12/17/2021 Calibr Ventures c/o Andy Byde, (Applicant / Owner) Exhibit 8: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program County File #CDSD21-09581 3180 Walnut Boulevard Walnut Creek, CA 94596 June 2023 Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 2 of 13 SECTION 1: AESTHETICS Potential Impact: The change in ambient nighttime light levels on the project site, and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and affect adjacent light-sensitive areas, would determine whether the project could adversely affect nighttime views in the area. Project lighting could create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties. Mitigation Measures: Aesthetics 1 (AES-1): Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Lighting Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the CDD. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following measures: a. All outdoor lighting, including façade, yard, security, and streetlights, shall be oriented down, onto the project site or road. b. Back shields or functionally similar design elements shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site, and to ensure that lighting remains within the project site. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction plans for a building permit and during construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Submittal of lighting plan(s) for CDD review; Include CDD approved lighting plan(s) in construction plans for CDD review; and Implementation with oversight of Building Inspection during construction. SECTION 2: AIR QUALITY Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures: Air Quality 1 (AIR-1): The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans: a. All exposed non-paved surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and access roads) shall be watered at least two times per day and/or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to exposed non-paved surfaces. b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered and/or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard. c. All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping shall be prohibited. d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 3 of 13 e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes, as required by the California Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ACTM) Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations. Clear signage regarding idling restrictions shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. h. The prime construction contractor shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall take corrective action within 48 hours of receipt of the complaint. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Air Quality 2 (AIR-2): The following Mitigation Measure shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans: a. All off-road equipment equal to or greater than 25 horsepower shall meet either United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or California Air Resources Board (ARB) Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards during all construction activities. b. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, a construction management plan shall be submitted to the CDD for review and approval. The construction management plan shall demonstrate that the off-road equipment used on-site to construct the proposed project would comply with Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards. Off-road equipment descriptions and information included in the construction management plan should include, but is not limited to, equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number47T47T. Implementing Action: COA Timing Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction plans for a building permit and during construction. Responsible Department or Agency: Project proponent, CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Provide a copy of the Contact Sign required under MM AIR-1h and the Construction Management Plan required under MM AIR-2b for CDD review; Include MM AIR-1 and AIR-2a language on construction plans for CDD review; and Implementation with oversight of Building Inspection during construction. Potential Impact: Grading and construction activities using diesel powered vehicles and equipment on the site could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact by creating localized odors. Mitigation Measures: Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 4 of 13 Mitigation Measures Air Quality 1 and 2 would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. SECTION 3: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: Construction activities, including tree removal and site clearance, may impact nesting passerine birds and raptors. Mitigation Measures: Biology 1 (BIO-1): If project construction-related activities take place during the nesting season (February through August), an avian pre-construction survey for nesting passerine birds and raptors (birds of prey) within the project site and the trees within the adjacent riparian area shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist no more than 14 days prior to the commencement of the tree removal or project construction-related activities. If any bird listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) is found to be nesting within the project site or within the area of influence, an adequate protective buffer zone shall be established by a qualified Biologist to protect the nesting site. This buffer shall be a minimum of 75 feet from the project activities for passerine birds, and a minimum of 200 feet for raptors. The distance shall be determined by a qualified Biologist based on the site conditions (topography, if the nest is in a line of sight of the construction and the sensitivity of the birds nesting). The nest site(s) shall be monitored by a qualified Biologist periodically to see if the birds are stressed by the construction activities and if the protective buffer needs to be increased. Once the young have fledged and are flying well enough to avoid project construction zones (typically by August), a qualified Biologist shall determine if the project can proceed without further regard to the nest site(s). Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the CDD shall determine if project construction-related activities will take place during the nesting season, and if so, the avian pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: If during the nesting season: Prior to any disturbance of the project site; Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit; and During site clearing and construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project biologist (if applicable), CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Timing of building or grading permit issuance; and If applicable, submittal of avian pre-construction nesting survey for CDD review, and implementation of approved biologist mitigation measures with project biologist and Building Inspection oversight during site clearing and construction activities. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 5 of 13 Potential Impact: Construction activities, including tree removal and site clearance, may impact nesting bats. Mitigation Measures: Biology 2 (BIO-2): If project construction-related activities take place during seasonal periods of bat activity (mid–February through mid–October – ca. February 15–April 15, and August 15– October 30), a bat habitat assessment within the project site shall be conducted by a qualified Bat Biologist to determine suitability of each tree or existing structure as bat roost habitat. Structures found to have no suitable openings can be considered clear for project activities as long as they are maintained so that new openings do not occur. Structures found to provide suitable roosting habitat, but without evidence of use by bats, may be sealed until project activities occur, as recommended by the Bat Biologist. Structures with openings and exhibiting evidence of use by bats shall be scheduled for humane bat exclusion and eviction, conducted during appropriate seasons, and under supervision of a qualified Bat Biologist. Bat exclusion and eviction shall only occur between February 15 and April 15, and from August 15 through October 30, in order to avoid take of non-volant (non-flying or inactive, either young, or seasonally torpid) individuals. Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the CDD shall determine if project construction-related activities will take place during seasonal periods of bat activity, and if so, the bat habitat assessment shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: If during bat-activity season: Prior to any disturbance of the project site; Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit; and During site clearing and construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project biologist (if applicable), CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Timing of building or grading permit issuance; and If applicable, submittal of a bat habitat assessment for CDD review, and implementation of approved biologist mitigation measures with Building Inspection oversight during site clearing and construction activities. Potential Impact: Construction activities, including site clearance, may impact the Alameda whipsnake. Mitigation Measures: Biology 3 (BIO-3): A pre-construction survey for special-status reptile species shall be conducted no more than 48 hours prior to the commencement of tree removal or project construction- related activities to determine presence/absence of these species. Worker Environmental Awareness training discussing the potential for these species shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist or Biological Monitor for all construction personnel working within the project site. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 6 of 13 Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, the reptile pre-construction survey shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to any disturbance of the project site; Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit; and During site clearing and construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project biologist (if applicable), CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Timing of building or grading permit issuance; and Submittal of pre-construction reptile survey for CDD review, and implementation of approved biologist mitigation measures with Building Inspection oversight during site clearing and construction activities. Potential Impact: Construction activities, including site clearance, may impact the ephemeral drainage, and its associated riparian habitat. Mitigation Measures: Biology 4 (BIO-4): No work (including vegetation removal) shall take place within the riparian corridor and ephemeral drainage as indicated in the Biological Resource Analysis (BRA) Report completed by Olberding Environmental, Inc (Olberding) dated January 2023, unless evidence is provided to the CDD that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) reviewed and approved work within these areas. The plan set for a building permit shall show fencing that is approved by a qualified biologist to ensure work does not take place in this area. As-built photos shall be required prior to issuance of a grading or building permit to ensure that this fencing is installed. Biology 5 (BIO-5): At no time shall silt-laden runoff be allowed to enter on-site aquatic features and their associated habitats. Erosion control measures shall be utilized throughout all phases of operation where sediment runoff from the project may enter these aquatic features. Best Management Practices (BMPs) to avoid erosion, uncontrolled stormwater runoff and bank deterioration shall be implemented, following the requirements of the proposed project’s Stormwater Control Plan, and typically include silt fencing, coir rolls, and/or straw bale dikes. Biology 6 (BIO-6): No substances toxic to fish and wildlife shall be discharged or allowed to leach into the aquatic features present on-site. Materials deleterious or toxic to fish and wildlife, including, but not limited to, asphalt, tires, concrete, construction materials, treated wood, and creosote containing materials, shall not be stockpiled within 100 feet of any aquatic feature present on-site. Implementing Action: COA Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 7 of 13 Timing of Verification: Prior to any disturbance of the project site; Prior to CDD approval of construction; Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit; and During site clearing and construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, CDFW, RWQCB and/or USACE (if applicable), project biologist, CDD, and Grading and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Timing of building or grading permit issuance; If applicable, submittal of CDFW, RWQCB and/or USACE approval for CDD review; fencing details on construction plans for CDD review; photos of installed fencing for CDD review; and Implementation with Grading and Building Inspection oversight during site clearing and construction activities. Potential Impact: Code-protected trees being removed and work within the dripline of additional trees will occur to allow for project grading and construction. Tree removal has the potential to reduce natural habitat or create soil instability and/or erosion. Work within the dripline has the potential to impact tree health. Mitigation Measures: Biology 7 (BIO-7): As a result of tree removal, approval of a Tree Permit under the provisions of the County Tree Ordinance shall be required. The Tree Permit shall include a Tree Replacement Plan. The Tree Replacement Plan shall designate the approximate location, number, species and sizes of new trees to be planted. No tree shall be removed until a building or grading permit is issued. Biology 8 (BIO-8): To protect the trees to remain, approval of a Tree Permit under the provisions of the County Tree Ordinance shall be required. The Tree Permit shall include tree protection mitigation measures as described in the arborist report prepared by Jennifer Tso (#WE-10270A) of Traverso Tree Service dated January 10, 2023, and these mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction through the clearing, grading, and construction phases, and stated on all construction plans. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to submittal of a building permit; Prior to CDD approval of construction plans for a building permit; During site clearing, tree removal, and construction activities; Post restitution tree planting and prior to final building inspection; and Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 8 of 13 Prior to the release of tree bonds. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project arborist, CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Submittal of the required materials per the approved Tree Permit for CDD review; Include CDD approved tree plans and arborist tree mitigation measures in construction plans for CDD review; Implementation of approved arborist mitigation measures during site clearing, tree removal, and construction activities with Building Inspection and Project arborist oversight; As-built photos of trees to remain and planted restitution trees prior to final building inspection; and Verification by that restitution trees are still onsite and in good health prior to CDD release of tree bond(s). SECTION 4: CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.5. Subsurface construction activities have the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources. Historic resources can include wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. If during project construction, subsurface construction activities damaged previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources, there could be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measures: Cultural Resources 1 (CUL-1): All project-related ground disturbance shall be monitored by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards for archaeology. In the event that significant cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, the applicant/project owner or sponsor shall ensure that operations within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the archaeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The standard inadvertent discovery clause shall be included on the grading plans submitted to the City to inform contractors of this requirement. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. The archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City concerning appropriate measures, which shall be implemented by the applicant/project owner or sponsor to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to recordation on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, evaluation, or excavation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5. Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 9 of 13 Cultural Resources 2 (CUL-2): In the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 shall be followed. If during the course of construction activities there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: a. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code section 5097.98. b. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendant or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: • The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction plans for a building permit; and During construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project archeologist (if applicable), CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Include MM CUL-1 and MM CUL-2 language on construction plans for CDD review; Implementation with oversight of Building Inspection during construction; and Submittal of archaeologist report, in the event of a find, for CDD review. SECTION 5: GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potential Impact: The project could significantly impact the potential for increased exposure to adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Mitigation Measures: Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 10 of 13 Geology 1 (GEO-1): Prior to submittal of a building or grading permit, the project applicant shall incorporate all recommendations provided in the project-Geotechnical Exploration into project plans, which shall be subject to review and approval by the County Geologist, or designee, prior to permit issuance. The geotechnical recommendations shall be implemented including general earthwork recommendations for site preparation, conditioning of expansive soils, removal of buried structures, removal of fill and disturbed soil, surface and subsurface drainage, biofiltration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footings, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to submittal of a building permit; Prior to CDD approval of construction plans for a building permit; Structural review; and During Construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project geotechnical engineer and geologist, peer review of County geologist, CDD, and Grading and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Submittal of required materials per MM GEO-1 for County geologist and CDD review; Include CDD approved geotechnical report and any other pertinent materials/reports/plans in construction plans for CDD review; During structural review by County structural engineers, and During construction with Grading and Building Inspection approval. Potential Impact: There is a possibility that previously undiscovered buried fossils and other paleontological resources could be present and accidental discovery could occur. Mitigation Measures: Geology 2 (GEO-2): The applicant shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to conduct paleontological monitoring during all earth-disturbing construction activities. Should any significant fossils (I.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, the construction crew shall not attempt to remove them, as they could be extremely fragile and prone to crumbling, and to ensure their occurrence is properly recorded; instead, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they would be properly curated and made Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 11 of 13 accessible for future study. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, evidence shall be provided to CDD that a qualified paleontologist is contracted to implement this mitigation measure. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Submittal of required materials per MM GEO-2 for CDD review; and Prior to CDD approval of construction plans for a building permit and during construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, project paleontologist, CDD, and Grading and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Include MM GEO-2 language on construction plans for CDD review; and Implementation with oversight of Grading and Building Inspection and project paleontologist during construction. Section 13: NOISE Potential Impact: Construction related noise could impact adjacent sensitive receptors. Mitigation Measures: Noise 1 (NOI-1): The following Mitigation Measure shall be implemented during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans: a. The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. b. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. c. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. d. At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. e. The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. f. Unless specifically approved otherwise by the CDD, all construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and are prohibited on State Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 12 of 13 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) Juneteenth National Independence Holiday (Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day (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: http://www.opm.gov/Operating_Status_Schedules/fedhol/2015.asp California: http://www.ftb.ca.gov/aboutFTB/holidays.shtml g. Transportation of large trucks and heavy equipment is subject to the same restrictions that are imposed on construction activities, except that the hours are limited to 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM. Implementing Action: COA Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction plans for a building permit and during construction. Responsible Department, Agency, or Party: Project proponent, CDD, and Building Inspection. Compliance Verification: Include MM NOI- language on construction plans for CDD review; Implementation with oversight of Building Inspection during construction SECTION 18: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Condition of Approval (COA) CDSD21-09581 Community Development Division (CDD) Mitigation Measure (MM) Page 13 of 13 Implementation of mitigations measures Cultural Resources 1 and 2 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. Potential Impact: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. The expected construction and grading could cause ground disturbance which may impact heretofore undocumented cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: Implementation of mitigations measures Cultural Resources 1 and 2 would reduce the impact on archeological resources during project related work. SECTION 10: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potential Impact: As discussed in individual sections of the Initial Study, the project to create two parcels from the site may impact the quality of the environment (Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geological Resources, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources). Mitigation Measures: The impact would be reduced to a less than significant level with the adoption of the recommended Mitigation Measures that are specified in the respective sections of the Initial Study. Steven Pinza, Esq. Nob Hill Dr Walnut Creek, CA 94596 July 17, 2023 Dominque Vogelpohl Department of Conservation & Development Community Development Division 30 Muir Rd Martinez, CA 94553 Via Mail & Email at: Dominique.Vogelpohl@dcd.cccounty.us Ken Carlson District IV Supervisor 2255 Contra Costa Blvd #202 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Via Mail & Email at: SupervisorCarlson@bos.cccounty.us RE: 3180 Walnut Blvd Proposed Development (CDSD21-09581) Dear Dominique & Ken, My house is directly above the proposed development, and this development will quite literally be built in my backyard without a reasonable setback. I have the following concerns and requests both as the most adversely affected neighboring property and as a homeowner in Walnut Heights, a coveted area of unincorporated Walnut Creek where owners cherish the large lots, privacy & distance from neighbors, wildlife, and so much more. I. PRIVACY: NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL CREATE PRIVACY CONCERNS FOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES In an email to Dominique Vogelphol on February 23, 2023, I expressed serious privacy concerns which will arise if this development is built as planned. The new residential development, as proposed, will have significant negative impacts on privacy for the surrounding homes, especially mine. The neighboring homes all have large windows in which the new development, along with everyone who uses the proposed new street would look directly into. With my property in particular, there are literally no trees that border the proposed development, and my house (which stands about 30-50 feet above the lowest part of this development). This will mean that the windows, backyards, and driveways of the proposed development will be able to look directly into my home windows, including the bedrooms of my young daughters. While I asked this out of state developer to plant fast growing, large trees, they’ve refused to commit to doing so. II.PROPOSED LOT SIZES ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH GENERAL PLAN, ZONING, OR WALNUT HEIGHTS AREA This proposal asks for ten houses with lot sizes ranging from 9,292 to 17,659. This area is zoned R-20 (min. 20,000 sq. ft lots) and neighboring parcels all have lots exceeding this size. The average proposed lot size for this project is 11,842 which is less than half the size of neighboring parcels, less than all properties in Walnut Heights, and certainly not what is purposed for in the General Plan. R-20 zoning allows for 2.2 du/ac. The parcel is 2.88 acres which means the maximum dwelling units, in accordance with standards (and using the developer requested concession to utilize gross acreage for the density calculation), is 6 units, not 9 like the proposal claims they are allowed. Further, using net lot area of 2.43 acres, only 5 dwelling units allowed. the uniqueness of Walnut Heights, and is a detriment to all neighboring properties and the entire community. Under no circumstances should a variance be accepted to allow more than 5-6 swelling units, regardless of any low/moderate income inclusion the developer proposes. It is contrary to the norm of the neighborhood, against the true purpose behind the density bonus, destroys the Walnut Heights charm, and creates a crowded, congested, traffic laced area. III.A DEVELOPMENT WITH TEN HOMES WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC, NUMBER OF CARS ON ROAD, AND CREATE A DANGER TO NEIGHBORHOOD Part of the reason that lots are zoned to be at least 20,000 square feet is because the current layout of the streets and overall neighborhood design could not accommodate more. Adding ten houses compared to half the amount will increase the number of cars on the road significantly on an already busy, two-lane road. Right now, there is no direct path for anyone to walk or bike downtown from Walnut Heights, and although we’ve requested it for years, we remain without a sidewalk. As such, everyone is forced to walk or ride their bike dangerously close to the street. It’s dangerous for pedestrians, bike riders, and children, and installing a sidewalk is long overdue. Since the development will add a significant number of cars from the new homeowners, their guests, deliveries, etc., the developer here should have to add sidewalks not only in front of his property, but sidewalks all the way to the connecting sidewalk near Eckley Ln. It is commonplace for developers to include new items to benefit a community, and the installation of a sidewalk in this area will surely do that. IV. FLOODING WILL INCREASE WITH DEVELOPMENT AS PROPOSED There is a drainage swale along the north property line and the proposal indicates that they intend to utilize retaining walls but the site maps fail to indicate where the retaining walls will be built. From reading the proposal, it seems to indicate that they intend to build the retaining walls directly on the property line (the proposal states they are seeking a waiver to allow said retaining walls to have zero setback instead of the standard setback which is again intrusive. However, the property line on the north side falls directly in the swale. While I am not an engineer by any means, the logic prevails that 1) the structural integrity of said retaining walls will be compromised when the swale fills with water; and 2) if there is a retaining wall in or close to the swale, the water is going to have to go somewhere and will instead back up onto neighboring properties. This will cause significant issues including flooding and hillside erosion resulting in damage to neighboring houses. Further, the proposal indicates that they intend to use a detention basin and seeks an exemption to the required storage capacity of said basin. “Detention basins may be utilized only if they are approved by the public works department and contain at least fifteen acre-feet of storage capacity to provide regional flow mitigation benefits, except that smaller detention basins may be permitted where it can be shown to the satisfaction of the public works department that the development of a regional basin is not practical and that a smaller detention basin can be permanently operated and maintained by a public entity in a cost-effective manner.” 914-12.002 This proposal has not shown that a detention basin should be approved, let alone one of smaller size than required. Further, there has been no showing of who will maintain said basin. “The subdivider shall insure the maintenance of a detention basin facility through either an existing public maintenance entity or by the creation of a public maintenance entity. The entity shall have an adequate revenue source to assure perpetual maintenance.” 914-12.010 This proposal states that the stormwater would be released into an existing 30-inch storm drain line within Walnut Boulevard. The existing public storm drains in this area already do not have adequate capacity for stormwater runoff and floods upon significant rain. The streets in the area were severely flooded last year with substantial amounts of water, causing street closures and significant damage to a number of homes in the area. Not only would this project stress an already at capacity system if it were to conform to all County Requirements for Storm Water collection and conveyance for new developments, the proposal seeks to an exception to these requirements. (c) It is the purpose of the board of supervisors in enacting this division to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the unincorporated areas by: (1) Eliminating, to the maximum extent practicable, illicit stormwater discharges to the stormwater system, pollutants of which otherwise would degrade the water quality of local streams. (2)Minimizing increases in nonpoint source pollution caused by stormwater runoff from development that otherwise would degrade local water quality.(3)Controlling the discharge to the county's stormwater system from spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than stormwater.( 4)Reducing stormwater runoff rates and volumes and nonpoint source pollution whenever possible through stormwater management controls and ensuring that these management controls are properly maintained and pose no threat to public safety.(5)Promoting no adverse impact (NAI) policies as developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM), to the maximum extent practicable, in an effort to minimize the adverse impact of new development on stormwater quality or quantity. 1014-2.002 Allowing this project to proceed as proposed will cause significant harm through flooding, does not promote no adverse impact (NAI) policies, and should not be allowed. V. NEW SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF LIGHT WILL DRAMATICALLY ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORS The proposal admits that the project lighting could “create a potentially significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties” (page 139). They propose two mitigation measures: all outdoor lighting shall be oriented down and back shields shall be installed on every lighting pole to reduce lighting from spilling off site. These supposed mitigation measures are not enough to mitigate the environmental impact. First, the houses in the area will see significant new additional light and glare. Currently there is no light whatsoever in the area. There are no street lights, no lights from homes on the land, etc. With the development, there will be headlights of cars that are driving up the new street shining directly into neighboring properties. There will be 10 new houses all with interior and exterior lighting. There will be new street lamps. The proposal fails to show how simply pointing the exterior lights and street lamps downward is going to do anything about the adverse health effects that the project as proposed will have on the surrounding houses and those who live there. Second, the wildlife in the area will be negatively affected by the additional lighting. There are owls, bats, deer, racoons, birds, possums and many other animals that call this area home. The additional lights will not only disorient the wildlife, it will negatively affect their safety and the safety of those in the surrounding area when those animals find themselves exposed and/or unable to see due to the lights and dart across the street, etc. VI.EXISTING WILDLIFE WILL BE SEVERELY IMPACTED This project will have a significant adverse impact on existing wildlife. The proposal fails to show how their proposed mitigation strategies of “avoiding disturbances of active nests” and conducting a “survey” prior to construction would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. The proposal itself admits this project has the potential to destroy eggs or occupied nests, increase mortality of young and cause risk of injury or death to several special- status species. Walnut Heights is home to turkeys, deer, raccoons, different hawks, and so much more, and this parcel of land in particular is the main home for all of these animals (since it’s been vacant for 20+ years). Allowing ten homes on this parcel will eliminate any land for the animals to reside. VII.EXISTING TREES WILL BE REMOVED WITH NO INDICATION THAT NEW ONES WILL BE PLANTED Per the proposal, this site contains 74 trees protected under the Contra Costa Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. The project plans to remove 60% of the protected trees, keep a measly 30 or so trees. The trees are protected for a reason. They provide shade and nesting areas for local wildlife, create privacy, remove greenhouse gasses and are historically significant. The plan fails to identify which trees are being removed, their species, condition, their respective tree circumference or any other required information when seeking to remove trees. The plan also fails to include any information indicating the effect of the tree removal on soil stability, particularly the ones near the swall/creek. Contra Costa County Tree Ordinance. Further, even if the developer replants trees, they will take 20+ years to become mature to their current levels. VIII.CONCLUSION AND REQUESTS I respectfully request that this letter is included in public remarks, reviewed by the planning department, and discussed with the board of supervisors. I specifically request the following: 1. That the development is a maximum of 5 or 6 units, which allows it to conform to the norm and charm of Walnut Heights; 2. That the developer pays for, and installs, fast growing trees around the entire periphery of the development in order to shield neighboring properties from privacy concerns, and remove less trees than their proposal requests; 3. That the developer takes steps to make the neighborhood safer by installing a sidewalk from View Ln all the way to the connecting sidewalk on Eckley Ln; 4.The developer is allowed one variance, not ten or more as currently requested. Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely, Steven Pinza, Esq. Nob Hill Dr Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Karin Gregory 20 View Lane Walnut Creek,CA 94596 July 14, 2023 Dominique Vogelpohl Department of Conservation and Development Community Development Division 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 (925) 655-2880 Dominique.Vogelpohl@dcd.cccounty.us Subject: Concerns Regarding Proposed 3180 Walnut Boulevard 10-Lot Subdivision (County File #CDSD21-09581) Dear Dominique, I hope this letter finds you in good health and high spirits. I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding the housing development project that is set to commence across the street from my residence in the Walnut Heights area of Walnut Creek. As a long-standing member of this community, I feel it is essential to bring attention to the potential implications and challenges this project may pose to the overall well-being and quality of life in our area. Firstly, I would like to emphasize that I understand the importance of housing development and the need for growth and progress within our county. However, I strongly believe that it is crucial to strike a balance between development and preserving the existing character and harmony of our neighborhood. The proposed project, as it stands, raises several concerns that I would like to bring to your attention: 1. Increased traffic congestion: The introduction of a housing development of this magnitude will inevitably lead to a significant increase in traffic volume on our already congested streets. This could pose serious safety hazards for residents, particularly children and elderly. 2. Strain on Infrastructure: Our neighborhood's infrastructure, including roads, utilities, and public services, may not be adequately equipped to handle the influx of residents that this development will bring. It is imperative that the necessary upgrades and improvements are made to ensure the seamless integration of this project into our community. 3. Environmental Impact: The proposed development may have adverse effects on our local environment, including potential damage to natural habitats, disruption of wildlife, and increased strain on resources such as water and electricity. It is crucial to conduct a thorough environmental impact assessment to ensure responsible development that minimizes harm to our ecosystem. 4.Aesthetic Concerns:Our community boasts a unique charm and character,which is highly valued by its residents.The proposed project's design and architecture should be in line with the existing style and aesthetics to ensure visual harmony and prevent the development from being an eyesore or detracting from the overall ambiance of our neighborhood. I kindly request that you consider these concerns and take appropriate action to ensure that the proposed housing development aligns with the best interests of the community.I urge you to engage in a transparent dialogue with residents,holding public meetings to listen to our concerns,answer our questions,and provide regular updates on the progress of the project. This will foster an environment of trust and open communication,enabling us to work collaboratively towards a mutually beneficial outcome. Additionally,I encourage you to explore alternative locations for the housing development that may be better suited to accommodate the project's requirements without directly impacting our immediate neighborhood.By doing so,we can strike a balance between growth and preservation,creating a win-win situation for all parties involved. Thank you for your time and consideration.I trust that you will take our concerns seriously and act in the best interest of the community.I look forward to hearing from you regarding the steps that will be taken to address these concerns. Kind regards, Karin Gregory From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:3180 Walnut Blvd - concerns about upcoming development Date:Monday, July 17, 2023 9:34:40 PM Hi Dominique , I hope you're doing well. I'm the homeowner at 293 Nob Hill Dr, next to 3180 Walnut Blvd, the property that Calibr Ventures plans to develop. I'd had a look over the environmental impact proposal, and I'd like to reach out directly to share some concerns and potential solutions. I've shared a copy of this Andy at Calibr and with Ken Carlson (District IV Supervisor) as well. First off - I'm supportive of building more housing in the bay area, and have no intention of being a knee-jerk NIMBY and pushing back on this project wholesale. With that said, there's a reason that I bought a house in Walnut Creek as opposed to other cities in the area: for our safe neighborhoods, abundance of mature trees, and privacy. In order to preserve what we all love about this city, it's critical that we be thoughtful about the way we build, that preserves these principles of safety, environmentalism and privacy. I have some concerns about the current plans for 3180 Walnut Blvd that appear to violate these principles, and some suggestions of how they can be addressed without drastic changes to the project. 1. Concern: Lack of visual privacy between lots 3, 4 and 5, and 293 and 297 Nob Hill, as well as removal of mature vegetation Details: In the current plan, Lots 3, 4 and 5 will back up directly to 293 and 297 Nob Hill, resulting in lack of privacy for the owners of their lots (293 and 297 will look directly into their backyards and upstairs bedrooms). These lots are all being built with the minimal backyard setbacks allowable by law, which further exacerbates this problem. This is a poor experience both for the owners of the lots and for myself. Even more concerningly, the subdivision development plan (attached) calls for removal of 43 trees. Removing trees (both young and mature) without a plan for replacement seems like the last thing we should be doing in a place where shade and soil erosion prevention are so important. This is deeply concerning. Recommendation: Plant mature, drought-tolerant trees along the property line dividing lots 3, 4 and 5 from 293 and 297 Nob Hill. The California Pepper is a good choice - this is a fast-growing, evergreen, drought-tolerant tree already present throughout Walnut Creek that comes recommended by specialists and Devil Mountain Nursery and Moon Valley Nursery. The trees planted would need to be mature (20ft high) in order to provide privacy, and would need automatic irrigation installed until their roots are established. However, the cost of these trees is likely to be recouped in the increased property value from shade and aesthetics that mature trees provide. 2. Concern: Above-ground power and utility lines Details: I saw in an earlier draft of the environmental impact report that the developer is requesting an exception to allow the use of above-ground power lines instead of burying them. Is this correct? If so, this would be very concerning - above-ground power lines, in addition to being an eyesore, pose a fire hazard to surrounding trees and I'm not aware of any new construction in Walnut Creek in which above-ground power is standard. Recommendation: Confirm that the plan is to bury power and utility lines below ground. 3. Concern: Increasing housing density without increasing neighborhood sidewalk Eric Dorman coverage is a safety hazard Details: The development plan calls for developing 10 single-family homes, which we can conservatively estimate (4 people to a family) means bringing roughly 40 new people to the neighborhood. Presumably these people will want to access Downtown and Ignacio Valley Road on foot, but in order to do so they have no choice but to walk on Walnut Blvd all the way to Homestead Ave on the street, without a single foot of sidewalk coverage. This is a pedestrian death waiting to happen. Recommendation: Reduce the number of lots being added. At the very least, install sidewalk on at least one side of the street on Walnut Blvd from the proposed subdivision to Homestead Ave. Thanks for taking the time to read. In your role at the Department of Conservation and Development, I know you care deeply about balancing the need to build housing in California with the importance of environmentalism and safety, so I'd love to get your thoughts on this project and the above recommendations. Are you comfortable with this project plan as it's currently drafted? Do you think it might make sense to formally recommend some of the above steps? Thanks, Eric Dorman 293 Nob Hill Dr From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:Concerned Walnut Heights Neighbors (County File # CDSD21-09581) Date:Tuesday, July 18, 2023 8:14:22 AM Attachments:NeighborhoodLetter-County File #CSSD21-09581-7.11.2023_Dominique.pdf Dear Dominique, This email supplements the neighborhood signed letter sent earlier this week to your office at 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553. We are writing to express our serious concerns about the proposed development of ten houses at 3180 Walnut Blvd (County File # CDSD21-09581). As home owners and residents of the immediate surrounding area, we are worried about the impact this development will have on our community. Firstly, we are concerned about the density of the development. Our understanding is that the lot is zoned R-20, which means 20,000 square foot lots, and these proposed lots are less than half of that. If the developer conformed to the zoning, they would build ~5 homes, or about half of what they are currently proposing. The density of 10 residences will create privacy issues for all of our homes, increased lights that will enter our windows, increased traffic on an already tight road, drainage issues, wildlife disturbance, and will directly jeopardize many of the reasons we all moved to Walnut Heights. Secondly, we are worried about the removal of trees. The developer plans to remove 40+ trees, and we are concerned that protected trees will be removed under the radar. To mitigate these concerns, we urge the county to hire another arborist to confirm the number of trees being removed. Thirdly, we are concerned about the impact on wildlife. The development will remove deer, wild turkey, western screech owl, and other animal habitat, and we are worried about the disturbance this will cause to the local ecosystem. Finally, we are concerned about the downstream impact on our community. The development will limit views for our properties, and we are worried about the increased light and amplified sound that will come from the development. We are also worried about the impact on traffic and drainage in the area. We urge the county to mitigate these issues by reducing the density of the development by conforming to the zoning, adding trees for privacy, and exploring alternative measures to benefit the area, such as sidewalks from View Lane all the way to the First Church of Christ, Scientist at 2 Eckley Ln, so we all have a path to walk downtown. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please contact us by replying to this email or you can reach John Livingood as the primary contact to discuss any questions you may have. Sincerely, John and Amanda Livingood, 3171 Walnut Blvd John and Kimberly Asher, 3175 Walnut Blvd John Livingwood Tom and Leanne Corkill, 3161 Walnut Blvd Michael and Amanda Binswanger, 3181 Walnut Blvd Jason and Laura Bauer, 3185 Walnut Blvd From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:Planned project at 3180 Walnut Blvd Walnut Creek Ca. Date:Thursday, July 20, 2023 4:36:34 PM Ms. Vogelpohl; My name is James A. Fuller I live at 3160 Walnut Blvd in Walnut Creek my property borders the planned project named above consisting of 10 2story homes. We have lived here and within 1mi of this location most of my life my father who was a local building contractor built most of the homes in this area before the Rudgear area was developed by Whitecliff Homes. My subcontracting company did most of their projects so I do understand why the developer would like to build here. My issue with the project is it's size and location people that have bought in this area bought here because they wanted big lot's that afforded them some privacy and also allowed them to enjoy the wildlife which is amazing, One of these the spotted newt is actually considered endangered.The Bagot's who lived on the property during the same time period as us had agreed to sell the property to us but the death of my 2 children months apart a few years ago and my wife being moved to a rest home because of Alzhimers put me in a financial position that made that impossible over 100 neighbors have expressed their displeasure over this Project.I could go on and on about the cutting of trees how the size of each lot is completely opposite of its intended use planned over 75yrs ago and the increase of the already nightmarish traffic. We have owned this land for over 75yrs,I hope you will take my words into consideration as the process moves forward. Sincerely James A. Fuller. JAMES FULLER From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:Proposed development at 3180 Walnut Blvd. Date:Thursday, July 20, 2023 8:21:16 PM Dear Dominique Vogelpohl, We wanted to share our deep concerns regarding this development of 10 homes in a zoning space for only five. After participating in the zoom conversation with Andy Byde, it is clear this is a purely financial gain decision by Calibr Ventures. This development doesn't fit in at all with our neighborhood. They will be destroying vital animal habitats, increasing traffic congestion on an already busy street with high traffic volume and NO sidewalks. In addition, the lights, noise and sewer/water potential problems are troubling. This development is directly across the street from our house and this is a street with a blind curve, coming down from the school which is jammed with cars during school drop off and pick up as well as commute traffic when cars cut through our neighborhood to get to Ygnacio Valley Road. Building ten homes on a lot zoned for five is NOT truly about building affordable housing as they are building the minimum number required (1/10) to qualify for the density bonus. Rather, it is greed run amok. Please consider the community first and the developer second. Thank you for your consideration. John and Kim Asher 3175 Walnut Blvd. Kim Asher From: To:Supervisor Carlson Cc:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:3180 Walnut Blvd Date:Thursday, July 20, 2023 8:32:04 PM Good Evening Supervisor Carlson - I am writing to express my concern about the proposed development by CALIBR Development at 3180 Walnut Boulevard in Walnut Creek. I live on Nob Hill Drive, across the street from the proposed development. My concerns are many, but I will list just a few… - Environmental Impact - this lot is the home to many wild animals that will be displaced. I wonder if a complete biological impact report has been completed? Drainage? Sewer, electrical, etc.? - Density - The proposal is to squeeze 10 new SFRs in a 2.8 acre lot. The average lot size in this neighborhood is currently is over 1/2 acre. The proposed lot sizes in this development range from 10,000 to 17,000 SF. This developer is clearly trying to squeeze every last drop of profit from a lot that should not host more than 4 or 5 houses maximum. Per Mr. Byde, he expects selling prices of $2-2.5 million each, with the exception of lot 4, for which he will receive some sort of low-moderate housing bonus to pocket. - Traffic - Walnut Heights Elementary School is only a few hundred yards from this proposed development site. Traffic during mornings and afternoons is already unbearable. Adding 10 homes right in the middle of the traffic jam will create a nightmare scenario. I’m very concerned about the increased threat of child pedestrian accidents in an already dangerous thoroughfare. I hope you will consider my concerns and the concerns of your other constituents in the neighborhood and block this proposal. It is a sordid attempt to squeeze ten lots out of one by a greed-motivated developer that already carries an unsavory reputation for past developments under the name, Braddock and Logan (Google it). This proposal does not fit our neighborhood and would benefit no one other than the developer. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Matthew Gould Matthew Gould From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl; Supervisor Carlson Subject:Proposed development on 3180 Walnut Blvd Date:Thursday, July 20, 2023 11:26:12 PM Ken Carlson, District IV Supervisor Dominique Vogelpohl, Project Planner Department of Conservation and Development Community Development Division Ms. Vogelpohl & Mr. Carlson. First of all, thank you for what you do. And thank you for reading this letter. (By the way, I am happy to say I voted for you, Ken!) My name is Kathryn Swift. I live at 395 Nob Hill Drive, which is behind and diagonally adjacent to 3180 Walnut Blvd. I am writing to you to voice my concerns regarding what will be built on this property, since the decision made here will have a permanent impact on my property, as well as my enjoyment of it. Moreover, I have specific safety concerns I would like to raise to your attention. I bought my home on Nob Hill 4 years ago with the express intent to have more space between homes/lots, less proximity to my neighbors. My previous home in Pleasant Hill was on a $10K sq ft lot. I deliberately sought out a neighborhood where the average lot size was greater than $10K sq ft. My current lot size is $20K. Most of my neighbors' lots are also in this same range. This makes for a very peaceful, private, rural feeling. There is also very limited fencing here with many neighbors choosing to have no fences to mark the property lines. Families of deer roam free through the neighboring yards, with baby deer born and raised in our backyards. This is what I fell in love with about my home, and why I uprooted after 25 years in my previous home in Pleasant Hill. If 3180 Walnut Blvd is allowed to proceed with ten homes on 2.5 acres as proposed, the additional noise/leaf-blowers, light pollution from ten new houses/street lights, increased fire risk/electrical poles, and increased traffic - both auto, bicycle and pedestrian will be greatly impact my enjoyment of my property for all future years. Sadly, I'd end up living directly adjacent/behind the exact sort of situation I moved away from. My sense of tranquility and privacy would be lost. Note that the traffic issue is quite a meaningful safety risk, with zero sidewalk along Walnut Blvd for vast stretches, all the way down to Eckley Ln. It is especially unsafe for pedestrians and cyclists since there is zero shoulder for walking. Furthermore, the sidewalk situation causes most pedestrians to detour onto my street (Nob Hill Dr.) using it as the walking route to nearby Walnut Elementary school. Ten additional homes will compound this pedestrian safety risk. Finally, I am quite concerned with increased ground saturation/potential for flooding. Earlier this year my first floor flooded due to over-saturation of the ground upon which my home sits, which caused water to seep up through the foundation. I had to rip out all of the floor on the first floor, and am still repairing that damage. There is a seasonal culvert which starts at the edge of my property and runs through 3180 Walnut Blvd. Because of its proximity, I believe that ten additional homes/driveways/roads which will cover a large percentage of the ground at 3180 Walnut Blvd will compound my already tenuous flooding situation. Kathryn Swift In summary, I cherish the peacefulness, quiet, low-light pollution and privacy which result from larger lot sizes, and specifically moved here for this reason. The lack of sidewalk/accommodations for pedestrians or bicyclists along Walnut Blvd is already a serious safety problem. Building ten homes on 3180 Walnut Blvd places my home at increased risk for future flooding by adding more cement and reducing the ability of the ground to absorb water from future storms. For these reasons I am imploring for the decision-making bodies to re-scope the approved project on 3180 Walnut Blvd to allow for a maximum of 4 homes (since roads will also take up some space from the 2.5 acre lot, and part of the lot which is a seasonal culvert should remain undeveloped) resulting in individual lot sizes of roughly ~$20K sq ft. each. I would also like to suggest several accommodations that would help mitigate the impact on the neighborhood as well as its local wildlife: 1. Leave ample room in between homes/yards & around the perimeter of the development for wildlife to continue to navigate between houses. 2. Preserve & build around any large native trees (e.g. oak trees) 3. Consider limiting the use of fencing, or using low, see-through or decorative fencing only, and letting parts of the property remain undeveloped (such as the seasonal culvert). 4. Install no street lights 5. Bury any new telephone/power poles 6. Install sidewalk or bike lane from Walnut Elementary to Eckley Ln. 7. Limit square footage footprint of homes (Sorry I do not know what would constitute a conservative size in terms of ground saturation purposes.) What you decide will have an impact on me for many years to come so I thank you for thoughtful consideration of my concerns and requests. Sincerely, Kathryn Swift 395 Nob Hill Drive Walnut Creek, CA 94596 From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:Response to proposal for development at 3180 Walnut Blvd. Date:Friday, July 21, 2023 9:55:24 AM July 21, 2023 Dear Mr. Carlson and Ms. Vogelpohl, We are property owners at 3151 Walnut Blvd. I am writing with regard to Caliber Ventures’ proposal to build 10 houses at 3180 Walnut Blvd. After reviewing the Proposed Development Plan and attending the developers’ informational Zoom for neighbors last night, I am strongly opposed to their proposal for several reasons: ·My two major concerns are the impact the development would have on the amount of/speed of traffic and the safety of Walnut Blvd. for pedestrians and motorists. Our section of Walnut Blvd. is already a dangerous, overused speedway, and adding vehicles for 10 families at that curve can only make the safety and quality of life issues worse. The route from that lot to Walnut Heights School is not safe for children walking to school. ·Secondly, 10 homes are crammed into that lot, out of keeping with the character of the neighborhood. It is clear that the developer opted for 10 homes rather than 6 or 8 in order to benefit from regulations rewarding developers for inclusion of a lower income house. I welcome lower income residents, and hope that the city and county will do more to provide housing for them in our area, but not by creating a poorly located cookie cutter development. I would of course like for the property to remain a wildlife haven and remnant of the area’s history, but understand that that is not likely or even possible. Therefore, I urge the city to respond to the proposal by reducing the number of homes to 5 and adding a contingency that there must be a city/county commitment to additional traffic/safety remediation measures (e.g., several stop signs on Walnut Blvd. between Shady Glen and Walnut Heights School) before the project is approved. Thank you for all you do to make Walnut Creek a great town. If there is more that I need to do to oppose this development, please let me know. Judy Hirabayashi 3151 Walnut Blvd Judy Hirabayashi From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:3180 Walnut Blvd 94596 Date:Friday, July 21, 2023 10:35:29 AM Dear Ms. Vogelpohl, I recently learned of the development proposed at 3180 Walnut Blvd 94596. As a resident of 15 years in this beautiful neighborhood, it concerns me that this developer may be permitted to so drastically change the landscape of our neighborhood. My lot is adjacent to 2 lots directly adjacent to the development site. (401 Nob Hill Drive) As you know, the neighborhood is comprised of lot sizes of approximately 20,000 sq ft or more. This distance between homes contributes greatly to the serenity and beauty of our neighborhood. My backyard overlooks the proposed site. It would be jarring to look out of our yard and back windows to enjoy the breathing space of the nicely spaced out homes with developed foliage and then to see so many homes on land stripped of mature foliage and crammed into less than 3 acres. Please ask the developer to reconsider scaling back number of homes to 5-6 consistent with surrounding landscape. The majority of owners who form the circle of Nob Hill Drive and Walnut Blvd have chosen not to fence in our back lots. This has created an unofficial “ open space” which allows the many deer/fawns, wild turkeys, coyotes, peacocks, snakes, possum, raccoons and lizards to roam and feed freely. The deer in particular find needed relief in the shade of the trees on our very hot summer days. The deer also make a nightly pilgrimage from the creek below up thru this space. The turkeys flap up nightly into the trees to seek refuge from their natural predators. The turkeys, turkey vultures, ospreys, hawks, wild yellow canaries, owls, wood peckers and California quail all coexist in this space. My 14 year has learned so much about birds while observing them since birth right in our own yard. They can easily identify most birds just watching them fly between trees in this “open space”. It has fostered their curiosity in birds and encouraged them to do their own research discovering interesting data on their habitats, feeding and mating habits. We have learned a great deal about our neighbor birds from my youngest. They have shared this knowledge and experience with school mates and teachers at Walnut Heights Elementary School and Walnut Creek Intermediate. These are some of the beauties you cannot see or measure right here in our community. These are beauties you cannot build or recreate. Please ask the developer to do everything in their power to protect this. Not only for existing residents but for the new neighbors who will purchase these new homes and who we will welcome into the community. Please ask them to reconsider the removal of so many trees as each tree is a potential home or resting spot for so many of our neighbor birds. If trees are removed please ask them to replant mature, native trees to help replace the natural habitat that will be so significantly altered. Our back lot is not fenced for approximately 50-60 feet to our neighborhood’s property line. Please ask developer to consider unfenced, open distance to maintain some sense of this unofficial “open space”. Christina Chin The one area our community falls short in is sideways or bike lanes that would allow us to get out of our cars and walk or bike downtown for exercise, to get to/from our schools and to Safeway to get groceries. Please ask the developer to consider funding some improvements to our community. Thank you for your consideration of my concerns. Please reach out if you have any questions. Sincerely, Christina Chin From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:Re: 3180 Walnut Blvd Date:Friday, July 21, 2023 1:00:13 PM Hello Ms. Vogelpohl, I am a resident near the proposed development at 3180 Walnut Blvd. I'm concerned that there has been very little traffic analysis done on this particular area. Literally 0.3 miles up the road is Walnut Heights Elementary school where approximately 330 students ages TK-5 attend. Last year, the district partnered with WCPD, Sheriff's Office, and an outside traffic analysis agency to study the area directly around the school and it was deemed unsafe. Because of this, we have a WCPD officer stationed near the crosswalk to encourage people to slow down. Our crossing guard has had one too many close calls. Those reports should all be available at the district office or school principal for you to review. This subdivision of 10 homes is a lot for our little roads to handle. We don't have sidewalks for children to walk on. We don't have stop signs from this property up to the school. Our district does not have buses. Let me be more crystal clear, there are zero school buses to get children to school. The only way to get them there is via car or on foot. Most opt for the car because of the safety. Adding 10-20 cars is a lot. As a parent trying to get one child to the elementary school and the other to Walnut Creek Intermediate, the only path is Walnut Blvd and it's already a mess. I encourage you to please partner with the school district on this before you approve this subdivision. Thank you, Eryn Eryn Holl From: To:Dominique Vogelpohl Subject:3180 Walnut Blvd Walnut Creek Project Date:Friday, July 21, 2023 9:45:18 PM Dear Dominique Vogelpohl: I live at 3150 Walnut Blvd and am generally supportive of the building project assuming that traffic speeds can be regulated better. We have a raceway many days with people speeding at 40-50 or more mph. We believe that much of this traffic are people cutting through the neighborhood during commute hours but it could be neighbors. Adding more people who will exit onto Walnut Blvd may create more hazards. There may be other neighbors that oppose this project but I believe we need to build more homes and infill is a good way to go as we already have schools and parks. It would be nice if the children in those homes could actually walk safely to Walnut Heights Elementary School. Please add traffic signs to slow down the traffic. A speed bump will not deter these drivers as we have a construction spot at 3160 and most fly over that. Hopefully that will be fixed soon. Diana Doughtie Sent from my iPhone Diana Doughtie Good Afternoon, My name Is William Goodwin and I am the homeowner of 3131 Walnut Blvd. in unincorporated Walnut Creek (Walnut Heights). I received an announcement regarding a proposed development plan for a 10 house installation at 3180 Walnut Blvd. which is approx. 5 houses away from my home, on Friday July 14 2023. In this correspondence it was mentioned that a forum via Zoom was offered less than a week later on July 20 2023. During this Zoom call a neighbor sent me an E-mail from a Steve Pinza mentioning that today Friday 7-21-2023 is the last day deadline to submit a letter regarding the proposed development. I have received no prior notification of this deadline. I find this to be a wholly inadequate amount of time to properly respond to this project voicing the numerous legal and quality of life concerns that directly and indirectly effect hundreds of homes in this long established neighborhood.!! I have left messages for Ken Carlson and Dominique Vogelpohl letting them know my concerns about the inadequate timing of this submittal period and inadequate notification to the many concerned neighbors who have not been made aware of this extreme unprecedented proposed project, I have to receive a response from them. Please put this project on hold until all neighbors’ concerns have been allowed to be submitted in writing on this subject prior to any Public Hearings or further approvals surrounding this project. Thank you, William Goodwin 3131 Walnut Blvd. Walnut Creek, CA 94596 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0475 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports to submit a grant application to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and accept funding up to $505,525 to reimburse the Airports Division for design costs related to the Security Upgrade Project at Buchanan Field, Pacheco area (100% Airport Enterprise Fund). Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Greg Baer, Director of Airports Report Title:Acceptance of Federal Aviation Administration Grant Funding to Reimburse the Airports Division for Design Costs Associated with the Security Upgrade Project at Buchanan Field ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports to submit an Airport Improvement Program (AIP)grant application to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)for $505,525 to reimburse the Airports Division for design costs related to the Security Upgrade Project at Buchanan Field, Pacheco area (District IV). APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports,or designee,to sign a Statement of Acceptance with the Federal Aviation Administration for up to $505,525 of grant funds to reimburse the Airports Division for design costs associated with the Security Upgrade Project. FISCAL IMPACT: The total eligible costs for the project’s design were $561,695. This amount was fully funded by the Airport Enterprise Fund during Fiscal Years 2020-21 and 2021-22. It is anticipated that the FAA will reimburse 90%, or $505,525. BACKGROUND: Buchanan Field is a FAA Federal Aviation Regulation Part 139 certificated airport and must meet certain security requirements as established by the FAA and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). It is critical to continuously make security upgrades to maximize the benefits of new technology and replace aging equipment.Understanding the importance of continually enhancing the security at Buchanan Field Airport,the Airports Division entered into a Consulting Services Agreement with Kimley-Horn to prepare the security improvements design. The security improvement design was solely funded by the Airport Enterprise Fund with the expectation that the Airports CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0475,Version:1 The security improvement design was solely funded by the Airport Enterprise Fund with the expectation that the Airports Division would seek reimbursement from the FAA for this work at a later date.The security upgrade project is listed on the Airport Capital Improvement Program list for Buchanan Field Airport and,as such,staff anticipates that the project will be eligible for FAA funding. In June 2020,the Board authorized grant submittal and acceptance of federal funding for construction of added security improvements.In June 2021,the Board authorized construction of the next phase of security improvements.The security upgrade project is nearing completion and has resulted in over 16,500 linear feet of new fencing,new and upgraded vehicle and pedestrian access gates, and expanded electronic access and monitoring capabilities. The subject of this Staff Report is to allow the Director of Airports to seek grant funds to reimburse the Airports Division for the cost of the security improvement project design, consistent with the Airports’ Capital Improvements Plan on file with the FAA. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will not receive the anticipated FAA funding to reimburse the Airport Enterprise Fund for the design costs associated with the security upgrade project at Buchanan Field. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-69 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-69 to approve a records retention policy for the Airports Division in the Public Works Department, as recommended by the Director of Airports, Countywide. (No fiscal impact) Attachments:1. Airports Retention Policy, 2. Retention Schedule A Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Greg Baer, Director of Airports Report Title:Document Retention Policy -Airports Division of Public Works ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution to approve a records retention policy for the Airports Division in the Public Works Department, as recommended by the Director of Airports, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: In accordance with government code and best management practices, the Airports Division has drafted the attached retention policy to manage the voluminous amount of records generated and received over the past six to seven decades. The Airports Division needs to dispose of unnecessary records and documents that, 1) have no historical significance or further administrative value, 2) are not required to be maintained by state or federal law and, 3) are no longer necessary for their purposes pursuant to Government Code sections 26201, 26202; 26205 and 26205.1. A records retention policy, inclusive of a retention schedule constitutes an active, continuing program for the retention and disposal of records both physically and electronically. Additionally, the approval of a records retention schedule constitutes continuing approval for Airports to properly dispose of the records as indicated within the schedule. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-69,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Airports Division would not be able to take advantage of the inherent benefits of a government code compliant retention policy. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Resolution No. 2024/ IN THE MATTER OF: Approving and Implementing a Document Retention Policy for the Airports Division of Public Works. WHEREAS, it is important for the Airports Division to establish a comprehensive document retention policy to efficiently manage and safeguard its records and documents in accordance with legal requirements and best practices; and WHEREAS, the adoption of a document retention policy aligns with the organizational objectives of the Airports Division to enhance operational efficiency and promote responsible stewardship of resources; and WHEREAS, an appropriate records retention policy will assist the Airports Division by documenting which records require office, electronic or temporary storage, which records have historic or research value, and which records should be destroyed because they no longer have any administrative, fiscal or legal value; and WHEREAS, the destruction and disposition of the Airports Division’s records pursuant to the proposed records retention schedule will not adversely affect any interest of the Airports Division or the public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors hereby approves the implementation of the attached document retention policy for the Airports Division of Public Works. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-69,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Contra Costa County Public Works - Airports Division Document Retention Policy Effective Date: February 27, 2024 1. The purpose of this document retention policy is to establish guidelines for the retention and disposal of records within the County’s Airports Division (“Airports”) in accordance with legal requirements, operational needs, historical value, and best practices. a. This policy applies to all records created, received, maintained, or transmitted by Airports Staff regardless of format or medium. This policy covers both electronic and physical record keeping. b. It is the intent of this policy to ensure that Airports does not retain records which are legally required to be maintained by other County departments or divisions. c. In collaboration with other Public Works staff and legal counsel, it is the responsibility of Airports Staff, to oversee the implementation and enforcement of this policy. All Airports Staff will assist in ensuring compliance within their respective areas and maintain the records retention schedule in line with current federal, state, and county guidelines. d. All records are categorized in the Airports Retention Schedule (“Schedule A”) based on the subdivision in the Airports division (i.e., properties, administrative, environmental, finance, and operations). Each category adheres to specific legal requirements, and those statutory references are provided in Schedule A. e. Schedule A will be reviewed by Airports staff for ongoing compliance with federal, state, and county laws no less than once every two years and will be updated on an as-needed basis for the same. f. Upon identification of records absent from Schedule A, designated personnel shall be responsible for expanding the schedule's content. This entails specifying the category of the record, determining the appropriate duration for its retention, and citing the relevant statutory basis. g. This policy shall undergo periodic reviews to ensure its effectiveness and relevance. Amendments may be proposed and incorporated based on changing operational needs, retention of identical documents being retained by other County departments or divisions, legal requirements, and advancements in document management technology. h. An active record is defined as a document within its current term, actively serving its intended purpose. A non-active document is defined as one that has fulfilled its role due to project completion, agreement expiration, termination, or being superseded by updated information. 2. Digitization is the primary mode of document maintenance within Airports. a. The primary method for maintaining active documents within Airports are electronic formats. Paper copies of active documents shall be preserved when dictated by legal mandates or under extraordinary circumstances, as determined by the Director of Airports. b. Airports staff may maintain working files that contain physical documents; however, it is essential to note that any physical documents related to airport business and/or operations must be initially preserved in digital format before considering physical storage, i.e., digital files shall be maintained as the most comprehensive source. In accordance with the provisions outlined in Schedule A, the storage of non-active records should predominantly be in electronic format. Deviations from this approach should be in alignment with Schedule A. 3. For non-active documents, the Director of Airports, or their designee will determine storage requirements in accordance with any federal, state and/or County guidelines. 4. Record disposal will be completed on an as needed basis, and Airports staff will dispose of all physical documents via shredding. a. Airports Staff will refer to Schedule A for the retention schedule before the destruction of documents. b. Documents not found on Schedule A should only be destroyed once Airports Management can establish a retention schedule or for non-active documents exceeding seven (7) years of age. 5. Document Maturation a. Physical non-active documents exceeding seven (7) years in age and not included in Schedule A, may be authorized for disposal by the Director of Airports. b. Electronic non-active documents exceeding seven (7) years in age not included in Schedule A should either be archived or deleted, as determined by the Director of Airports. Records Retention Schedule Contra Costa County Airports Schedule A Description Custodian Active Non-Active Statutory Active Non-Active Record Record Reference Format Format Licenses Properties Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic GC 26202; ; GC 26205.1 Deeds Properties PERM PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic GC 26202; ; GC 26205.1 Hangar Rental Files Properties Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic Department Policy Gate Access card Files Properties Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic Department Policy Leases Properties PERM PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic Department Policy As Builts Properties PERM PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic Department Policy Easements Properties PERM PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic/Paper Department Policy Key Card Agreements Properties Duration CY+2 Electronic Electronic Department Policy Hangar Waiting List Applications Properties CY+2 Electronic/Paper GC 26202; ; GC 26205.1 Tie-Down Agreements Properties Duration CY+2 Electronic Electronic GC 26202; ; GC 26205.1 Certificate of insurance Properties Duration Electronic Electronic GC 26202; ; GC 26205.1 UAS Tenant - Temporary Use Permits Properties Duration CY+3 Electronic Electronic Department Policy UAS Non-Tenant Properties Duration CY+4 Electronic Electronic Department Policy ALUC related documents Properties PERM PERM Electronic Electronic Department Policy G Receipts Finance Perm PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic/Paper GC 14740-14774 Budget Documents Finance CY+2 4 Electronic Electronic GC 14740-14774 Invoices Finance CY+2 4 Electronic Electronic GC 14740-14774 Contracts Finance Duration 7 Electronic Electronic GC 14740-14774 Contract Amendments Finance Duration 7 Electronic Electronic GC 14740-14774 DBE Documentation/Report Finance 4 PERM Electronic Electronic 49 CFR Part 18.48 CPI Letters and Increases Finance CY+2 Electronic GC 14740-14774 Concession Reports Finance CY+2 4 Electronic Electronic GC 14740-14774 CY = Current Year Retention Requirements (yrs) Grant Applications Admin Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 Grant Agreements Admin Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 Grant Invoices Admin Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 Grant Documentation Admin Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 Grant Statements Admin Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 AIP related documents Admin Duration 3 Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 AIP Contracts Admin PERM PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 FAA Deviation Letters and responses Admin PERM PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic FAA Grant assurance #13 and 49 CFR Part 18.42 AAC Reports Admin PERM PERM Electronic Electronic AAC By Laws AAC Minutes Admin PERM PERM Electronic Electronic AAC By Laws AAC Agendas Admin PERM PERM Electronic Electronic AAC By Laws Airport Committee Agendas Admin PERM PERM Electronic Electronic Department Policy Airport Committee Minutes Admin PERM PERM Electronic Electronic Department Policy Airport Inspections Admin PERM PERM Electronic Electronic 49 CFR Part 18.48 Airport Master Plans Admin Duration PERM Electronic/Paper Electronic 49 CFR Part 18.48 Press Release Admin CY+1 1 Electronic Electronic Department Policy Newsletter Admin CY 1 Electronic Electronic Department Policy Request for proposal Admin Duration 5 Electronic Electronic Department Policy RFP Responses Admin Duration 5 Paper/Electronic Paper/Electronic Department Policy Noise Inquiries Admin CY 1 Electronic Electronic Department Policy Aircraft Inventory Admin CY+3 2 Electronic Electronic Department Policy Corresponsdence Admin Cy+1 3 Electronic Electronic Department Policy Staff Reports Admin Cy+1 Electronic Department Policy Public records requests Admin CY+1 2 Electronic Electronic Department Policy FAA Memos and Circulars Admin PERM PERM Electronic Electronic 49 CFR Part 18.48 Outdated or Superseded SOPs and Internal Policies Admin 2 Electronic Electronic Department Policy SOPs Admin Duration 2 Electronic/Paper Electronic Department Policy Airfield Maintenance Records OPS CY 3 Electronic Electronic Department Policy Safety records and/or training OPS 24 Months*3 Electronic Electronic FAA Policy/Guidelines Accident reports OPS CY 5 Electronic Electronic Department Policy SWPPP Environmental PERM PERM Paper/Electronic Paper/Electronic 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(i)-(xi) r Habitat Management Land License Agreements Environmental PERM PERM Electronic Electronic 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(i)-(xi) r HML Easements Environmental PERM PERM Electronic Electronic 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(i)-(xi) r HML Wildlife Management Plan Environmental PERM PERM Electronic Electronic 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(i)-(xi) r BCCB Easements Environmental PERM PERM Electronic Electronic 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(i)-(xi) r BCCB Wildlife Management Plan Environmental PERM PERM Electronic Electronic 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(i)-(xi) r HML Contracts (i.e. work being completed, permission to enter, etc) Environmental PERM PERM Electronic Electronic CA Easement Hazardous Waste Manifests Environmental CY+4 3 Paper Electronic Sections 25160 and 25205.15 of the Health and Safety Code Monthly Visual Observation forms Environmental Cy+3 2 Paper Electronic Department Policy CERS Environmental PERM Paper/Electronic Paper/Electronic CCR Title 27, Division 1, Subdivision 4, §15290(b) California State Waterboard related documents Environmental PERM PERM Paper/Electronic Paper/Electronic STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 2017-0020 PFAS/PFOA Documents Environmental PERM PERM Paper/Electronic Paper/Electronic DOT/FAA/TC-22/23 CUPA Environmental PERM PERM Paper/Electronic Paper/Electronic CCR Title 27, Division 1, Subdivision 4, §15290(b) Range Manager Reports Environmental PERM PERM Electronic Electronic Department Policy 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0476 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/30/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RATIFY the Animal Services Director’s acceptance of the California for All Animals Program Sniptember Spay/Neuter grant through UC Davis, in an amount up to $100,000 for the initial term of January 20, 2023, through January 19, 2024; and AUTHORIZE and APPROVE the Animal Services Director, or designee, to extend the grant term, and execute any necessary grant actions or modifications, through December 31, 2025. (100% State funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Jane Andreotti, Interim Animal Services Director Report Title:Grant Acceptance and Modification for the California for All Animals Program Sniptember Spay/Neuter Grant ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RATIFY the Animal Services Director’s acceptance of the California for All Animals Program Sniptember Spay/Neuter grant through UC Davis, in an amount up to $100,000 for the initial term of January 20, 2023, through January 19, 2024; and AUTHORIZE and APPROVE the Animal Services Director, or designee, to extend the grant term, and execute any necessary grant actions or modifications, through December 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Funded by CalAnimals/UC Davis Grant. 100% State funds, no County match required. BACKGROUND: In October, 2022, the Animal Services Department applied for California for All Animals (CalAnimals) Program Sniptember Spay/Neuter grant funds. The Department was awarded $100,000 by CalAnimals/UC Davis to increase spay and neuter services for Contra Costa County residents. The grant agreement is between Contra Costa County Animal Services and The Regents of the University of California on behalf of its Davis Campus School of Veterinary Medicine on behalf of its Koret Shelter Medicine Program, effective January 20, 2023. In FY 2022/23 the Department processed a Request for Proposal (RFP), which was to award grantees funding from July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. Due to a delay in the Request for Proposal and the contract negotiation process the Department requested a grant extension. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0476,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to approve this amendment will prevent the Department from completing the contract timeline obligations and fund community spay/neuter programs as outlined by UC Davis and prevent necessary Spay and Neuter Services for Contra Costa County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0477 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Assessor, or designee, to execute a Software Maintenance and Support Agreement with The Sidwell Company, in the amount of $23,802 for maintenance and support for the Parcel Fabric Geographic Information System for the period of October 3, 2023, through October 2, 2024. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Gus Kramer, County Assessor Report Title:Approve and Authorize a Software Maintenance and Support Agreement with The Sidwell Company for the Geographic Information System ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Assessor, or designee, to execute a Software Maintenance and Support Agreement with The Sidwell Company, in the amount of $23,801.71 for maintenance and support for the Parcel Fabric Geographic Information System (GIS) for the period of October 3, 2023, through October 2, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: General funds, in the amount of $23,801.71 will be used to provide software maintenance and support. BACKGROUND: In April of 2017, the Assessor's Office received approval to contract with The Sidwell Company to install and configure software and provide technical support services and training necessary for the Assessor's Office to transition from a Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) based mapping environment to a Parcel Fabric Geographic Information System (GIS) based mapping environment. It is crucial that The Sidwell Company continue to provide maintenance and support for the Geographical Information System. The Assessor's Office recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve and authorize the execution of the Software Maintenance and Support Agreement with The Sidwell Company in the amount of $23,801.71. The Sidwell Company’s liability under the agreement is limited to the amount paid by County annually under CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0477,Version:1 the agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Agreement is not approved, the Assessor's Office will no longer have the ability to maintain and support GIS, which has become instrumental in eliminating redundancy, streamlining workflow processes, and improving efficiencies. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0478 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:DENY the claims filed by Golden State Water Company (formerly known as, Southern California Water Company) and ExteNet Systems, LLC in the total amount of $81,803, plus interest, in unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2019/2020. Attachments:1. Attachment A, 2. Attachment B Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Thomas Geiger, County Counsel Report Title:Denial of claims filed by Golden State Water Company (formerly known as, Southern California Water Company) and ExteNet Systems, LLC. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: DENY the claims filed by Golden State Water Company (formerly known as, Southern California Water Company) and ExteNet Systems, LLC in the total amount of $81,803.17, plus interest, in unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2019/2020. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Golden State Water Company and ExteNet Systems, LLC (collectively, “Claimants”) have filed claims for refund of property taxes against the County, essentially alleging that the statutory formula used to calculate their property tax rate violates the California Constitution. In October 2023, ExteNet Systems, LLC submitted a claim to the County in the amount of $19,600.92. In December 2023, Golden State Water Company submitted a claim to the County in the amount of $62,202.25. [The claims are provided in Attachments A-B.] The claims, in the collective amount of $81,803.17, are for property taxes paid for tax year 2019/2020. Claimants request interest on the requested refund amounts. Claimants have submitted refund claims for prior years based on the same allegation, which the County has denied. Other counties that have received similar refund claims from at least one of these Claimants appear to have uniformly denied the claims. In January 2023, Santa Clara County prevailed before the Court of Appeal on the basis that the statutory tax rate imposed on property owned by such entities does not violate the California Constitution. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0478,Version:1 ANALYSIS: Under the California Constitution, certain property owned or used by utilities and telecommunication companies, among others, is annually assessed by the State Board of Equalization ("BOE"). (Cal. Const., article XIII, § 19.) The amount of such "unitary property" assessments attributed to the County by the BOE are then taxed by the County in accordance with a statutory formula. (See Rev. & Tax. Code, § 100.) The Auditor-Controller uses the amount of unitary property assessments annually provided by the BOE to calculate the amount of taxes to be levied on these properties in accordance with a formula mandated by state law (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 100). Based on this formula, the unitary tax rate for 2019/2020 is 1.6865%. The Auditor-Controller has confirmed that the rate was correctly calculated pursuant to the State law, and the Office of the State Controller has deemed it correct. Claimants argue that they are entitled to a partial refund of taxes on the grounds that they were illegally levied because the formula used to calculate the rate is unconstitutional. However, the County is given no discretion on its calculation of the unitary tax rate; it is a mandated formula set by the State. A January 2023 decision from the California Court of Appeals has affirmed the constitutionality of the rate. (County of Santa Clara v. Sup. Ct. (2023) 87 Cal.App.5th 347.) For these reasons, the claim should be denied. Additionally, Golden State Water Company’s claim is denied as untimely per Revenue & Taxation Code section 5097(a)(2) because it was not submitted within four years of the December 3, 2019 payment of property taxes. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Failure to take the recommended action would result in interest continuing to accrue on a potential court- ordered refund of property taxes. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT B 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0479 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the allocation of Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds in the amount of $74,522 to fund 11 conservation projects fully or partially, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. (100% Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund) Attachments:1. FWC_memo_IOC_01-26-24 Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Internal Operations Committee Report Title:RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ALLOCATION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE PROPAGATION FUNDS ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the allocation of Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds in the amount of $74,522 to fund 11 conservation projects fully or partially, as recommended by the Fish and Wildlife Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. The recommendation will have no impact on the County General Fund. State law defines how money in the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund may be spent and the Board of Supervisors is responsible for authorizing specific expenditures. BACKGROUND: The Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund was established in accordance with the California Fish and Game Code (Code) 13100 as a repository for fines collected for certain violations of the Code and other regulations related to fish and game. The most common fines are small ($25-$150) and are processed through the four Superior Courts in Contra Costa County. The fines typically stem from hunting or fishing violations (e.g. not possessing a valid license), and illegal dumping. Occasionally portions of larger fines that result from violations, including failure to obtain appropriate permits for activities such as streambed alteration, illegal take of a special status species, and pollution of waters are deposited into the Fund. On November 22, 2010, the IOC received a status report from the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) regarding the allocation of propagation funds by the Fish and Wildlife Committee (FWC). CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0479,Version:1 The IOC accepted the report along with a recommendation that IOC conduct a preliminary review of annual FWC grant recommendations prior to Board of Supervisors review. In April 2023, the IOC recommended grant awards for nine projects totaling $60,702, which the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved. The Board subsequently, on June 27, 2023, approved a 10th out of cycle grant of propagation funds in the amount of $10,343. On February 3, 2024, the IOC reviewed and approved recommendations to fund 11 of 12 conservation projects fully or partially, totaling $74,522.06 or approximately 13% of the available fund balance. Details on the proposals, Fish and Wildlife Committee recommendations, and method of solicitation and selection are provided in the attached memo and proposed award schedule. The IOC also notes that the Fish and Wildlife Committee is transitioning this year to a calendar year grant schedule. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: N/A CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Page 1 of 5 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE c/o Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: 925-655-2703 TO: Internal Operations Committee Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Diane Burgis, Vice Chair FROM: From: Daniel Pellegrini, Chair Fish and Wildlife Committee By: Maureen Parkes, Senior Planning Technician Staff to Fish and Wildlife Committee DATE: January 26, 2024 SUBJECT: Grant Funding Recommendations from the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Committee The Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Committee (FWC) completed its review of the 2024 grant requests for funding from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund (Fund) and is forwarding its grant award recommendations to the Internal Operations Committee (IO). The FWC reviewed 12 grant applications and recommends 11 of them for full or partial funding. The FWC is requesting that the IO Committee consider these recommendations and make their own recommendation for consideration by the full Board of Supervisors (Board). This memo provides background on the grant program, explains the review process performed by the FWC and documents the FWC’s recommendations on grant funding. I. Background Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund The Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund (Fund) was established in accordance with the California Fish and Game Code (Code) 13100 as a repository for fines collected for certain violations of the Code and other regulations related to fish and game. The most common fines are small ($25-$150) and are processed through the four Superior Courts in Contra Costa County. A portion of the fines are deposited into the Fund. The fines typically stem from hunting or fishing violations (e.g. not possessing a valid license) and illegal dumping. Occasionally portions of larger fines that result from violations, including failure to obtain appropriate permits for activities such as streambed alteration, illegal take of a special status species, and pollution of waters are deposited into the Fund. In 2022, due to the settlement of The People of the State of California vs. LP, SFPP, regarding a Kinder Morgan ruptured oil pipeline that leaked a large amount of gasoline into a drainage canal that occurred in November 2020, a deposit of $497,500 was made into the Fund. As of October 9, 2023, the Fund had an available balance of $571,625.00. Page 2 of 5 FWC Grant Program The Board has charged the FWC with coordinating a process by which fine money could be appropriately “expended for the protection, conservation, propagation, and preservation of fish and wildlife” [Fish and Game Code 13100]. Since 1996, the FWC has implemented a structured process for reviewing funding requests. The FWC developed a grant application packet (attached), which includes a cover letter to explain the grant process and funding priorities, an application to solicit relevant information about the project, and a copy of the expenditure criteria established by California law for the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. Public Outreach to Advertise the Grant Program On June 27, 2023, the application packet was sent to the Fish and Wildlife Committee mailing list, the Contra Costa Watershed Forum mailing list, all Contra Costa County school districts, Contra Costa College, Diablo Valley College, Los Medanos College, UC Berkeley, Cal State University - East Bay, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, and St. Mary’s College. The CCC Office of Communications and Media distributed a press release to local and regional media outlets regarding the availability of the grant application packet. CCTV publicized it on the CountyNet Bulletin Board which reaches 400,000+ homes in the County. Supervisors also included the announcement in their email newsletters. It was posted as a newsflash on the Department of Conservation and Development’s website and displayed on its social media accounts: Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. It was also made available on the Committee’s website and to anyone who requested a copy. FWC Review Process for 2023 and 2024 Grant Awards This year the Committee adjusted the grant cycle to ensure future grant awards would be received earlier in the year. To implement this change, the Committee held two grant rounds in 2023. • The Committee reviewed 2023 grant applications in January and February 2023, made recommendations to the IO Committee and the IO Committee’s recommendations were approved by the Board of Supervisors on April 18, 2023. • The 2024 FWC grant recommendations for your consideration now were reviewed in October and November 2023. • Moving forward, the FWC will review grant proposals annually in September and October with an estimated notification of award prior to the beginning of the new year. 12 applications requesting a total of $140,039.34 were reviewed for the 2024 grant cycle. Several applicants attended FWC meetings to make themselves available to answer questions regarding their applications. II. Recommendation of Funding on Grants for 2024 At its November 15, 2023 meeting, the FWC recommended full or partial funding for 11 of the proposed projects. Projects recommended for funding total $74,522.06 and are geographically located across the County. More details are provided on the attached grant recommendations chart, which provides information on all of the applications. The specific FWC recommendations and vote are listed on Pages 3 through 5 of this memo. Members in attendance and voting on these items were: Nicole Balbas (At- large), Susan Heckly (District II), Kathleen Jennings (At-large), Brett Morris (District IV) and Daniel Pellegrini (District V). Page 3 of 5 The following recommendations are for full funding of the project as proposed unless noted otherwise. FWC Recommendations: 1) Appropriate $8,217.35 to Lindsay Wildlife Experience for their “Lindsay Wildlife Experience food storage expansion” project. Funds will be used to purchase a refrigerator and freezer which are needed due to an increase in the amount of food they need to store and provide to their patients. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 2) Appropriate $10,470.00 to Lindsay Wildlife Experience for their “Creating an Interactive Bee Exhibit and Education Programs” project. The upgrade of their HiveAlive! exhibit on the museum's exhibit floor will make it more engaging and interactive, focusing on the importance of pollinators, including honey bees and California native bees. Partial funding is recommended and may only be used for exhibit signage, graphics and exhibit title; and honeycomb fabrication as shown in the grant application project budget. Vote 4-1 (Ayes: Balbas, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: Heckly; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 3) Appropriate $2,823.00 to John Muir Chapter of Trout Unlimited for their “Wildcat Creek Water Quality and Fish Habitat Monitoring Study” project. This study is a continuation of water quality monitoring in collaboration with The Watershed Project and East Bay Regional Park District. It will provide a direct benefit to anadromous fish species in Wildcat Creek by better understanding spawning and rearing conditions in the creek, and interventions necessary to accompany fish passage improvements. Funds will be used for a Hobo Waterproof Shuttle, Replacement DO sensor cap, shipping and miscellaneous supplies. *The FWC recommends approval of the applicant’s request for an exception for non-profit organizations that can demonstrate financial hardship that would allow for a partial disbursement of funds (up to ½ of the grant award) after the grant is awarded. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 4) Appropriate $5,640.00 to International Bird Rescue for their “Address HPAI and Repair and Improve Rehabilitation Habitats for Contra Costa Wildlife Harmed by Human Impact – 2024” project. Partial funding is recommended and may only be used for materials for staff to create outdoor Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) screen facilities, repair and replace obsolete and unsafe rehabilitation caging areas; and eight 12' capture nets with articulated net and telescoping handles necessary for staff and specially trained volunteers to safely capture injured and oiled wildlife. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 5) Appropriate $5,167.00 to Marine Science Institute for their “2024 Delta Discovery Voyage Program” project. The DDV program teaches science that is unique and relevant to the region where the students live, human direct effect on the Delta ecosystem, and why it is important to protect watersheds. Funds will be used for expendable supplies - buckets, fish keys, posters, otter trawl nets, hand nets, plankton nets and partial funding for ship fuel. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 6) Appropriate $8,700.00 to Contra Costa Resource Conservation District for their “eDNA Monitoring of Restored Livestock Ponds” project. The project will assess the success of their Page 4 of 5 livestock pond improvement program and identify what species are using the ponds. CCRCD hopes to leverage the results of this project to better illustrate the importance of their livestock ponds and their restoration for the broad benefit of wildlife. Funds will be used for eDNA monitoring kits for vertebrates and invertebrates and chest waders for staff. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 7) Appropriate $5,960.00 to Contra Costa Resource Conservation District and Friends of San Ramon Creek for their “2024 Arundo Removal and Replacement in San Ramon Creek Subwatershed” project to assist with the completion of their Arundo removal project in the San Ramon Creek Watershed in 2024. Funds will be used for a chipper rental, Roundup, MarkIt Dye, and two backpack sprayers. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 8) Appropriate $6,392.00 to Contra Costa Resource Conservation District for their “Ours to Conserve: Flora and Fauna in the Watershed Signage Program” project. The project will increase the public's environmental literacy by installing new, redesigned “Ours to Conserve: Flora and Fauna in the Watershed” signs across Contra Costa County watersheds in English and Spanish text. Funding will be used for aluminum sign panels, sign posts, and sign mounting hardware. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 9) Appropriate $16,807.00 to Golden Gate Bird Alliance for their “San Francisco Bay Osprey Camera” project. The San Francisco Bay Osprey Camera (established in 1917) is an exceptional and popular educational tool for connecting people with Ospreys and teaching about their conservation success story. Funding will be used for a new camera, HDOnTap technician trip cost, lift rental to access crane site and one year of annual costs of webcam streaming services through HDOnTap. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 10) Appropriate $3,435.00 to the City of Lafayette for their “Living with Wildlife in Lafayette Educational Signs” project. Signs and handouts will have information about animals that live in the Lafayette area. Partial funding is recommended for five A-Frame signs, 50 Coroplast signs, printed 10 each of five designs, shipping and delivery for signs and frames, and sales tax for signage as outlined in the additional information provided by the City of Lafayette on November 9, 2023. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 11) Appropriate $910.71 to the Pleasant Hill Instructional Garden for their “Pleasant Hill Instructional Garden Wildlife Habitat Signage” project. The funds will be used for signage and associated materials to use as an educational tool for visitors, volunteers, students and school staff to describe characteristics of a healthy wildlife habitat, to explain plant and pollinator ecology at the garden, and to encourage community adoption of more sustainable practices. Funds will be used for metal posts, concrete mix, strong tie metal brackets, plastic cover and printed signs. Page 5 of 5 * The FWC recommends approval of the applicant’s request that full grant funding be disbursed prior to the beginning of the project due to financial hardship and the requested amount is under $1,000. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) 12) Further, the FWC also recommended that within a year of grant funding approval, or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, recipients must submit a final project report which includes invoices and receipts documenting how funds were spent and the results of the project. Details will be outlined in the grant award packet provided to all successful applicants. Vote 5-0 (Ayes: Balbas, Heckly, Jennings, Morris and Pellegrini; Noes: None; Abstain: None; Absent: Gehlke, Rogers and Solis) Staff recommends that grant awardees may request modifications to the budget allocations described in their grant applications in writing and those requests may be approved by the Fish and Wildlife Committee or the Department of Conservation and Development Director or his designee. Please contact Maureen Parkes at 925-655-2909 or Abigail Fateman at 925-655-2908 with any questions. Attachments: • Grant application packet for Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds • Chart summarizing the applications and recommendations Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation A Lindsay Wildlife Experience non-profit Lindsay Wildlife Experience food storage expansion (b) temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife. Countywide $8,217.35 $8,217.35 This is a request for funds for expansion of food storage capacity. Funds are requested for a refrigerator and freezer. Proposed Work Schedule: The project would begin upon notice of grant approval. The equipment can be delivered within 30 days of order placement. This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (b) temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife. Full funding is recommended for the purchase of a refrigerator and freezer which are needed due to an increase in the amount of food they need to store and provide to their patients. B Lindsay Wildlife Experience non-profit Creating an Interactive Bee Exhibit and Education Programs (a) public education Countywide $15,100.00 $10,470.00 This is a request for funds to upgrade the HiveAlive! exhibit on the museum's exhibit floor to make it more engaging and interactive, and to create associated programming. Funds are requested for graphic design for all signage, graphics, and exhibit layout; all exhibit signage, graphics, and exhibit title; honeycomb fabrication and painting walls. Proposed Work Schedule: January 2024 - December 2024 This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education. The upgrade will focus on the importance of pollinators, including honey bees and California native bees, how they support the growth of native plants, and what individuals can do to help protect their local pollinators inspiring environmental stewardship. Partial funding is recommended and may only be used for exhibit signage, graphics and exhibit title; and honeycomb fabrication as shown in the grant application project budget. Page 1 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation C John Muir Chapter of Trout Unlimited non-profit Wildcat Creek Water Quality and Fish Habitat Monitoring Study (e) habitat improvement West County $2,823.00 $2,823.00 This is a request for funds for equipment and supplies to monitor water quality and fish habitat in Upper Wildcat Creek watershed. This study is a continuation of water quality monitoring in collaboration with The Watershed Project and East Bay Regional Park District. Funds are requested for a Hobo Waterproof Shuttle, Replacement DO sensor cap, shipping and miscellaneous supplies. Proposed Work Schedule: Fall 2023 - May 2025 The applicant requests an exception for non-profit organizations that can demonstrate financial hardship that would allow for a partial disbursement of funds after the grant is awarded. The applicant provided justification in the grant application. This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (e) habitat improvement. The study will provide a direct benefit to anadromous fish species in Wildcat Creek by better understanding spawning and rearing conditions in the creek, and interventions necessary to accompany fish passage improvements. Additionally, the goal of their creek monitoring program is to train and engage citizen monitors on improving water quality in Contra Costa County in order to provide suitable habitat for cold water fish populations. Full funding is recommended for a Hobo Waterproof Shuttle, Replacement DO sensor cap, shipping and miscellaneous supplies. Page 2 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation D International Bird Rescue non-profit Address HPAI and Repair and Improve Rehabilitation Habitats for Contra Costa Wildlife Harmed by Human Impact - 2024 (a) public education (b) temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife (c) temporary treatment and care of wildlife confiscated by the department as evidence (i) scientific research* * CDFW has confirmed this project is eligible to receive funds under FGC Section 13103 (i) Countywide $21,462.28 $5,640.00 This is a request for funds to repair and replace currently unusable and obsolete facilities and materials. Funding is requested for eight Mirion Technologies Radiology Badges, repair of diving bird and pelican aviaries, supplies for the creation of additional HPAI screening and quarantine areas, and repair of rehabilitation habitats, eight 12' capture nets, and supplies for cleaning, sanitation/health, conservation of water and energy for eight pools. Proposed Work Schedule: This project can begin within 30 days of grant application approval and be completed within six months. The project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education, (b) temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife, and (c) temporary treatment and care of wildlife confiscated by the department as evidence, and (i) scientific research. Partial funding is recommended and may only be used for materials for staff to create outdoor Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) screen facilities, repair and replace obsolete and unsafe rehabilitation caging areas; and eight 12' capture nets with articulated net and telescoping handles necessary for staff and specially trained volunteers to safely capture injured and oiled wildlife. E Marine Science Institute non-profit 2024 Delta Discovery Voyage Program (a) public education Central County 48% East County 52% $5,167.00 $5,167.00 This is a request for funds for MSI's Delta wildlife and water education programs for 5th grade Contra Costa County students. Funding is requested for expendable supplies - buckets, fish keys, posters, otter trawl nets, hand nets, plankton nets (detailed supplies budget available upon request) and partial funding for ship fuel. Proposed Work Schedule: January 2024 - December 2024 This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education. The DDV program teaches science that is unique and relevant to the region where the students live, human direct effect on the Delta ecosystem, and why it is important to protect watersheds. The Committee recommends full funding for expendable supplies - buckets, fish keys, posters, otter trawl nets, hand nets, plankton nets and partial funding for ship fuel. Page 3 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation F Contra Costa Resource Conservation District government eDNA Monitoring of Restored Livestock Ponds (e) habitat improvement Countywide $8,700.00 $8,700.00 This is a request for funding for eDNA sampling to survey restored livestock ponds in Contra Costa County to determine species presence to better support future livestock pond restoration efforts. Funding is requested for eDNA monitoring kits for vertebrates and invertebrates and chest waders for staff. Proposed Work Schedule: January 2024 - December 2024 This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (e) habitat improvement. The project will assess the success of their livestock pond improvement program and identify what species are using the ponds. CCRCD hopes to leverage the results of this project to better illustrate the importance of their livestock ponds and their restoration for the broad benefit of wildlife. Full funding is recommended for eDNA monitoring kits for vertebrates and invertebrates and chest waders for staff. G Contra Costa Resource Conservation District and Friends of San Ramon Creek government 2024 Arundo Removal and Replacement in San Ramon Creek Subwatershed (e) habitat improvement Central County $5,960.00 $5,960.00 This is a request for funding for Friends of San Ramon Creek to continue its Arundo removal effort to treat Arundo regrowth at several sites in 2024. Funding is requested for chipper rental, Roundup, MarkIt Dye, and two backpack sprayers. Proposed Work Schedule: April 2024 - October 2024 This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (e) habitat improvement. Friends of San Ramon Creek plans to complete the removal of the last patches of Arundo in the San Ramon Creek Subwatershed in 2024. The chipper is needed to reduce the canes to a compostable, non-viable biomass and it is anticipated that they will need additional herbicide and spraying equipment to keep up with managing Arundo regrowth. Full funding is recommended for chipper rental, Roundup, MarkIt Dye, and two backpack sprayers. Page 4 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation H Contra Costa Resource Conservation District government "Ours to Conserve: Flora and Fauna in the Watershed" Signage Program (a) public education Countywide $6,392.00 $6,392.00 This is a request for funding for CCRCD to facilitate the replacement of damaged signs and introduce new, redesigned “Ours to Conserve: Flora and Fauna in the Watershed” signs across Contra Costa County watersheds in English and Spanish text. Funds are requested for aluminum sign panels, sign posts, and sign mounting hardware. Proposed Work Schedule: January 2024 - December 2024 This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education. The project will increase the public's environmental literacy by installing new, redesigned “Ours to Conserve: Flora and Fauna in the Watershed” signs across Contra Costa County watersheds in English and Spanish text. Full funding is recommended for aluminum sign panels, sign posts, and sign mounting hardware. I East Bay Regional Park District special district Clayton Ranch Regional Park Pond Restoration (e) habitat improvement East County $35,000.00 $0.00 This is a request for funds for a consultant to provide permitting support and coordination for a project to restore aquatic habitat for the following special status pond dwelling species: California Red-legged Frog, California Tiger Salamander and the Western Pond Turtle at Clayton Ranch which is operated by the East Bay Regional Park District. Permits provided to staff and available upon request: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit #TE-817400-14 • California Department of Fish and Wildlife permit #SC-2298 Proposed Work Schedule: Mid-February 2024 - December 2024 Although a valuable project, the Committee does not recommend funding because the funding request was to pay a consultant and they prefer to fund material expenses. Page 5 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation J Golden Gate Bird Alliance non-profit San Francisco Bay Osprey Camera (a) public education West County $16,807.00 $16,807.00 This is a request for funds for a new camera (and associated costs) to monitor Ospreys and their habitats. Funds are requested for a new camera, HDOnTap technician trip cost, lift rental to access crane site and one year of annual costs of webcam streaming services through HDOnTap. Proposed Work Schedule: November 2023 - July 2024 This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education. The San Francisco Bay Osprey Camera (established in 1917) is an exceptional and popular educational tool for connecting people with Ospreys and teaching about their conservation success story. By learning about their history and witnessing their success firsthand through live footage of a nesting pair, and by connecting to them personally through the community engagement, viewers learn about the importance of conservation and how we can have a positive impact on the environment by taking action. Full funding is recommended for a new camera, HDOnTap technician trip cost, lift rental to access crane site and one year of annual costs of webcam streaming services through HDOnTap. Page 6 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation K City of Lafayette government Living with Wildlife in Lafayette Educational Signs (a) public education Central County $13,500.00 $3,435.00 This is a request for funds to create five portable signs to educate the public about coyotes, wild boars, gopher snakes, mountain lions and wild turkeys, plus four tri-fold handouts about living with local wildlife. Funding is requested for content development by Lindsay Wildlife Experience and graphic design work, coordination of printing of signs and handouts, and purchase of A-Frame sign holders including shipping costs. Proposed Work Schedule: January 2024 - Approximately August 2024 This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education. Signs and handouts will have information on animals that live in the Lafayette area. Partial funding is recommended for five A-Frame signs, 50 Coroplast signs, printed 10 each of five designs, shipping and delivery for signs and frames and sales tax for signage as outlined in the additional information provided by the City of Lafayette on 11/9/23. Page 7 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation L Pleasant Hill Instructional Garden non-profit Pleasant Hill Instructional Garden Wildlife Habitat Signage (a) public education Central County $910.71 $910.71 This is a request for funds for signage and associated materials to use as an educational tool for visitors, volunteers, students and school staff to describe characteristics of a healthy wildlife habitat, to explain plant and pollinator ecology at the garden, and to encourage community adoption of more sustainable practices. Funds are requested for metal posts, concrete mix, strong tie metal brackets, plastic cover and printed signs. Proposed Work Schedule: ? This application was received approximately one hour after the deadline due to laptop malfunction. The applicant went to the library to complete the application and submitted it. The applicant requests that grant funding be disbursed prior to the beginning of the project since the requested amount is under $1,000. The applicant provided justification in the grant application. This project meets the requirements of Section 13103 (a) public education. The funds will be used for signage and associated materials to use as an educational tool for visitors, volunteers, students and school staff to describe characteristics of a healthy wildlife habitat, to explain plant and pollinator ecology at the garden, and to encourage community adoption of more sustainable practices. Full funding is recommended for metal posts, concrete mix, strong tie metal brackets, plastic cover and printed signs. Total $140,039.34 $74,522.06 $571,625.00 Remainder $431,585.66 $497,102.94 Total Available Funds as of October 9, 2023 Page 8 of 9 1/25/2024 Grant Applications and Fish and Wildlife Committee Recommendations 2024 Organization Type of Org Project Title Type of Project Location of Project Requested Funding Amount Recommended Funding Amount Staff Summary of Request FWC Rationale for Recommendation Subtotals By Region Requested Funding Amount Percentage of Total Amount Requested Recommended Funding Amount Percentage of Total Amount Recommended for Approval East $37,686.84 26.91%$2,686.84 3.61% West $19,630.00 14.02%$19,630.00 26.34% Central $22,850.87 16.32%$12,785.87 17.16% Countywide $59,871.63 42.75%$39,419.35 52.90% TOTAL $140,039.34 100.00%$74,522.06 100.00% Page 9 of 9 1/25/2024 Contra Costa County June 27, 2023 Dear Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund Grant Applicants: The Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Committee is pleased to announce that completed funding applications are now being accepted for consideration for the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund (Fund). All application materials and guidelines are attached. Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 27, 2023 (a postmark of September 27, 2023, does not satisfy the submission deadline). Proposals may be emailed or mailed. Any applications that are received after the due date or without a signature will not be considered. Staff will acknowledge receipt of each grant application. If you do not receive a confirmation of receipt contact Maureen Parkes at 925-655-2909 prior to the deadline. The recommendations of the Fish and Wildlife Committee will be forwarded to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, which maintains final decision-making authority for expenditures from the Fund. The Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund is entirely supported by fine revenues resulting from violations of the Fish and Game Code and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations in Contra Costa County (County). Projects awarded from the Fund must benefit the fish and wildlife resources of the County and must meet the requirements of Section 13103 of the Fish and Game Code (attached). If your project is eligible under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i), or (m) please send a copy of your draft proposal to Maureen Parkes at maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us by August 16, 2023. Staff will coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to confirm the project’s eligibility to receive funds. See Instructions for more details. All applications that satisfy the requirements listed in the funding application instructions will be considered. The Fish and Wildlife Committee strongly encourages applications related to: • improving habitat • scientific research • public education • threatened and endangered species • resolving human/wildlife interaction issues In addition to the above areas of interest, the Fish and Wildlife Committee wishes to fund one or more projects that increase collaboration with law enforcement agencies and community cultural organizations on enforcement issues and education focusing on communities that may be unaware of local fish and game laws. Projects that provide multilingual signage and educational materials are encouraged. The Fish and Wildlife Committee considers grant awards for prospective expenditures from non-profit organizations, schools, and government agencies. The Committee generally does not recommend funding for operating costs and overhead, such as staff salaries, benefits, or utilities. The Committee generally gives preference to funding material expenses (e.g. purchase of equipment and materials). Organizations, schools, and government agencies that have received previous Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund grants should have a positive track record of completing projects and submitting final reports in an efficient, timely and clear manner. John Kopchik Director Jason Crapo Deputy Director Maureen Toms Deputy Director Deidra Dingman Deputy Director Ruben Hernandez Deputy Director Gabriel Lemus Assistant Deputy Director Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Phone:1-855-323-2626 Page 2 The Committee expects to recommend awards to several applicants. However, it is possible that a particularly excellent proposal will be recommended to receive a large portion of the total available funds. During the 2023 grant cycle a total of $71,045 was awarded to ten projects. The awards ranged from $1,015 to $15,100. Available funds vary from year to year and the Fish and Wildlife Committee cannot commit to multi-year or recurring funding. The Board of Supervisors will make the final decision on the grant awards and successful applicants may anticipate receiving notification by January 2024. Project expenditures eligible for reimbursement must be made subsequent to Board of Supervisors approval of grant funding. The grant award funds will be disbursed on a cost reimbursement basis.* (See below for exceptions.) Within a year of grant funding approval, or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, recipients must submit a final project report which includes invoices and receipts documenting how funds were spent and the results of the project. Grant awardees may request a budget modification to address any proposed changes to the project costs. This request must be made in writing prior to incurring the unapproved expenses. Unapproved expenses will not be reimbursable. Fish and Wildlife Propagation fund grants will be disbursed after receipt and approval of the final project report. Details will be outlined in the grant award letter that is sent to all successful applicants. *Exception For Non-Profit Organizations That Can Demonstrate Financial Hardship: Private, non-profit entities that can demonstrate that providing Fish and Wildlife Propagation grant funding on a cost reimbursement basis will create a financial hardship and be detrimental to the operation of the program will be eligible to receive up to ½ of the grant amount after the grant is awarded. The remaining amount of the grant will be disbursed after the entity has submitted information including invoices and receipts documenting how the initial disbursement was spent. Within a year of initial notification of the grant funding award (January 2025), or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, the entity will be required to submit information including invoices and receipts documenting how the second disbursement was spent, and provide a final project report documenting the results of the project. *Exception For Small Projects Under $1,000: Grant funding may be disbursed to private, non-profit entities prior to the beginning of the project if the award is under $1,000 and the entity has provided documentation that the project could only be initiated with advance funding. Within a year of grant funding, or within one month of project completion, whichever comes sooner, recipients must submit a final project report which includes invoices and receipts documenting how funds were spent and the results of the project. The Committee appreciates your interest in this opportunity to improve the fish and wildlife resources in Contra Costa County. Should you have any questions about the Fish and Wildlife Committee or this funding program, please contact me at 925-655-2909 or maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us. Sincerely, Maureen Parkes Fish and Wildlife Committee Staff Page 1 of 2 INSTRUCTIONS What Must Be Included in Your Proposal (not to exceed 4 pages): 1) Signed Application Cover Page – See attached. (PDFs and e-signatures are acceptable) 2) Description of the project for which funding is requested. Please include an explanation of: • how this project will benefit the fish and wildlife of Contra Costa County • how this project meets the requirements of Section 13103 of the Fish & Game Code (attached) which defines the eligibility requirements for projects requesting funding from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. Indicate which letter(s) of the Section 13103 is/are satisfied. If your proposal is eligible under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i)*, or (m), a copy of your draft proposal must be sent to the attention of Maureen Parkes at maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us or at the address listed on Page 2 and received by August 16, 2023. Staff will coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to confirm the project’s eligibility to receive funds. *If your project is eligible under Section 13103 (i), and a scientific collection permit is required and issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, this will indicate that the project is eligible to receive Fish and Wildlife Propagation funds. Please send the scientific collection permit along with your grant application by the September 27, 2023 - 5:00 P.M. grant submission deadline. Scientific collection permits are not included in the grant application page limit. The Fish and Wildlife Committee wishes to be acknowledged for its financial support of the project. FWC or staff review may be required prior to printing any written materials that receive funding. Please refer to the guidelines listed below: • Grant recipients agree to obtain advance written approval from the FWC of any communication/written material that may reasonably be understood to represent the views of the FWC and to provide the FWC with reasonable opportunity to review, comment and approve the communication/written material. Grant recipients may use the following standard language in making attributions for funding by the FWC: • Attribution for full Grant funding: “This (research, publication, project, web site, report, etc.) was funded by the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Committee.” • Attribution for partial Grant funding: “This (research, publication, project, web site, report, etc.) is funded in part by the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Committee.” 3) Project schedule - The project must be completed within a year from the date you receive notification of funding (by January 2025). 4) Project budget (itemized). The Fish and Wildlife Committee generally does not recommend funding for operating costs and overhead. Examples for these include staff salaries, health insurance, and operation costs such as electricity to run an office. If an hourly rate is listed, overhead costs need to be itemized separately. The Committee generally gives preference to funding material expenses (e.g. purchase of equipment and materials). 5) Annual budget for the applying organization (not itemized). 6) Statement describing the applying organization, listing the Board of Directors and officers of the organization, and listing all affiliated organizations. 7) Statement describing the qualifications of the sponsoring organization and participating individuals for completing the project. 8) List of individuals responsible for performing project and of individuals responsible for overseeing project. 9) Statement describing the status of permit approvals necessary to perform project (if applicable). 10) Request for an exception to the grant funding cost reimbursement requirement due to financial hardship or an exception for a small project under $1,000. (This request does not count toward your page limit and is only required if requesting an exception.) Page 2 of 2 Format: • Your proposal packet, including cover sheet and any attachments must not exceed four single-sided pages or two double-sided pages, 8.5 by 11 inches in size. Electronic submittals are preferred. Please use 11 point font or larger and ½ inch margins or larger on your pages. If you submit more than 3 pages plus required cover sheet, your proposal may be disqualified without review. • If your project is eligible under Section 13103 (d), (h), (i), or (m) a copy of your draft proposal must be sent to the attention of Maureen Parkes at maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us and received by August 16, 2023. (See exception for Section 13103 (i) on Page 1.) • Do not attach an additional cover letter, brochures, posters, publications, CDs, DVDs, large maps or yellow-sticky paper (e.g. Post-ItTM). • Your complete application packet including signature must arrive by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 27, 2023 (Pacific Daylight Time) to be considered for funding. (Please note: A postmark of September 27, 2023 does not satisfy the submission deadline. If submitted after the deadline, your proposal will be disqualified).* Your complete application should be: Emailed: maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us or Mailed or Hand Delivered: Contra County Fish & Wildlife Committee c/o Contra Costa County Dept. of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553-4601 Attn: Maureen Parkes *Staff will acknowledge receipt of each grant application. If you do not receive an email confirmation of receipt, contact Maureen Parkes prior to the deadline by calling 925-655-2909. Final Checklist Before You Submit Your Proposal: Please note that your proposal will not be considered if you provide more materials than required below: • Signed Cover page (your proposal will be disqualified if it does not have your original signature on the cover page). • 3 pages or less on your project description (any extra attachments such as a map and an organization budget will be counted as one of the three page limit.) • If your project qualifies under Section 13013 (i) and you have been issued a scientific collection permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife please include it. (This is not a part of the page limit listed above.) • Request for an exception to the grant funding cost reimbursement requirement due to financial hardship or an exception for a small project under $1,000. (This is not a part of the page limit listed above and is only required if requesting an exception). If you have questions regarding the Contra Costa County Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund grant process, please contact Maureen Parkes: maureen.parkes@dcd.cccounty.us / (925) 655-2909. (a) Public education relating to the scientific principles of fish and wildlife conservation, consisting of supervised formal instruction carried out pursuant to a planned curriculum and aids to education such as literature, audio and video recordings, training models, and nature study facilities. (b) Temporary emergency treatment and care of injured or orphaned wildlife. (c) Temporary treatment and care of wildlife confiscated by the department as evidence. (d) Breeding, raising, purchasing, or releasing fish or wildlife which are to be released upon approval of the department pursuant to Sections 6400 and 6401 onto land or into waters of local, state, or federal agencies or onto land or into waters open to the public. (e) Improvement of fish and wildlife habitat, including, but not limited to, construction of fish screens, weirs, and ladders; drainage or other watershed improvements; gravel and rock removal or placement; construction of irrigation and water distribution systems; earthwork and grading; fencing; planting trees and other vegetation management; and removal of barriers to the migration of fish and wildlife. (f) Construction, maintenance, and operation of public hatchery facilities. (g) Purchase and maintain materials, supplies, or equipment for either the department's ownership and use or the department's use in the normal performance of the department's responsibilities. (h) Predator control actions for the benefit of fish or wildlife following certification in writing by the department that the proposed actions will significantly benefit a particular wildlife species. (i) Scientific fish and wildlife research conducted by institutions of higher learning, qualified researchers, or governmental agencies, if approved by the department. (j) Reasonable administrative costs, excluding the costs of audits required by Section 13104, for secretarial service, travel, and postage by the county fish and wildlife commission when authorized by the county board of supervisors. For purposes of this subdivision, "reasonable cost" means an amount which does not exceed 3 percent of the average amount received by the fund during the previous three-year period, or three thousand dollars ($3,000) annually, whichever is greater, excluding any funds carried over from a previous fiscal year. (k) Contributions to a secret witness program for the purpose of facilitating enforcement of this code and regulations adopted pursuant to this code. (l) Costs incurred by the district attorney or city attorney in investigating and prosecuting civil and criminal actions for violations of this code, as approved by the department. (m) Other expenditures, approved by the department, for the purpose of protecting, conserving, propagating, and preserving fish and wildlife. California Fish and Game Code Section 711.2. (a) "For purposes of this code, unless the context otherwise requires, "wildlife" means and includes all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, reptiles, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends for its continued viability ..." California Fish and Game Code Section 13103. Expenditures from the fish and wildlife propagation fund of any county may be made only for the following purposes: * *A scientific collection permit, if required and issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, indicates that the project is eligible to receive Fish and Wildlife Propagation funds. * Office Use Only: Contra Costa County 2024 Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund Application Cover Page Project title: Organization/Individual applying: (Organization type: please check one – government, non-profit, school, other (explain) Address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: Name and title of contact person: One sentence summary of proposal: Requested grant: Proposal prepared by (name & title): Signature (Typing your name does not count as a signature. If this section is empty, your proposal will not be considered): ________________________________________________ Signed on _______________ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0480 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ACCEPT a status report on youth services and the Independent Living Skills Program activities, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. Attachments:1. FHS Youth Services Presentation Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Family & Human Services Committee Report Title:Click or tap here to enter text. ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT a status report on youth services and the Independent Living Skills Program activities, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: An annual update of the Independent Living Schools Program administered by the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) was first referred to the Family and Human Services Committee by the Board of Supervisors on October 17, 2006. On June 7, 2016, EHSD requested, and the Board approved, expanding Referral #93 - Independent Living Skills Program to include additional youth services updates and retitling the referral to “Youth Services Report”, so that the department can include reports on all youth services offered in the community through EHSD, including Workforce Investment and Opportunity Act (WIOA) and CalWORKs youth services. On September 25, 2023, EHSD presented its most recent update to the Family and Human Services Committee on youth services and the Independent Living Skills Program activities. The Committee approved the attached report and directed staff to forward it to the Board of Supervisors for its information. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0480,Version:1 This report will not be received. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Marla Stuart, MSW PhD, Employment and Human Services Director info@ehsd.cccounty.us | 925-608-4800 Youth Served August 2023 September 25, 2023 1 Overview •Youth Served •Overview of Programs •Youth Centers •Serving Youth Across the County 2 “Youth” is an age category EHSD serves with specific programs geared to the needs of individuals as they transition from childhood to adulthood. Youth Served 3Data Sources: CalSAWS for benefits program participant list and ad-hoc ILSP, Summer Youth Program, CalLearn, and WIOA Youth participant lists * Count of individuals covered by Medi-Cal is a calculated approximation as data transition to new state system is in process ** Estimate obtained from 2021 ACS 5-Year Estimates Table S0101; added the number of age 15-19 individuals, age 20-24 individuals, and 20% of age 10-14 individuals = ~157,361 58,167 Number of unduplicated youth aged 14- 24 served by key EHSD programs in August 202337% Approximate percentage of the Youth population served in August 2023, assuming ~157,361 youth age 14-24 in Contra Costa County ** +3,536 from Aug 2022 +2% from Aug 2022 +132 from Aug 2022 54,499* 15,461 2,712 1,811 +1,650 from Aug 2022 -527 from Aug 2022 -154 from Aug 2022 Medi-Cal: 94% of Youth served CalFresh: 26% of Youth served CalWORKs: 5% of Youth served Adoption Assistance, Independent Living Skills Program (ILSP), Foster Care, KinGAP, Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Youth Programs, and other supportive services: : 3% of Youth served Map of Youth Served August 2023 4* Note: EHSD programs that serve age 14-24 youth include Medi-Cal, CalFresh, CalWORKs, Foster Care, KinGAP, Independent Living Skills Program, Adoption Assistance, and Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Youth Programs, and other supportive services. 3,206 youth served are located outside of Contra Costa County. Source: CalSAWS for benefits program participant list and ad-hoc ILSP, Summer Youth Program, CalLearn, and WIOA Youth participant lists Overview of Programs 5 Program Details 6 Program Eligibility Criteria # Served*Number Served as % of Contra Costa Age 14-24 Youth Population** Medi-Cal Making less than 138% poverty level (FPL) for household size; some children and pregnant women may qualify under higher FPLs 54,499 35% CalFresh Income, asset, and legal status requirements 15,461 10% CalWORKs Low income; child of a CalWORKs recipient age 18 or below, or age 18 or below and the head of household, or pregnant 2,712 2% Adoption Assistance, Foster Care, KinGAP, and other supportive services: Adoption Assistance: adopted child Foster Care: child in Foster Care system KinGAP: meeting all KinGAP eligibility conditions 1,637 1% Independent Living Skills Program In or recently transitioned from the Foster Care system 480 <1% Cal-Learn Pregnant and parenting teens who are 19 years of age or younger and receive CalWORKs as a Head of Household 12 <1% HYPE Summer Youth Program Teens age 14 and 15 whose parents are receiving CalWORKs 14 <1% WIOA Youth Programs Out-of-school youth with barriers or challenges to employment and low-income youth 209 <1% * All numbers show number of youth served in August 2023, except for HYPE Summer Youth Program (latest data available is from 2022) ** ~157,361 individuals; estimate obtained from 2021 ACS 5-Year Estimates Table S0101 by adding the number of age 15-19 individuals, age 20-24 individuals, and 20% of age 10-14 individuals Independent Living Skills Program 7 Program Highlights FY 2022-23 Independent Living Skills Program (ILSP) provides services to youth who are in care or recently transitioned from the Foster Care system. ILSP Program staff specialize in Education, Employment, Housing, and Health and Well Being, and serve youth up to age 21. Stipends, scholarships, and sponsorships issued 42 Youth receiving WIOA employment support52ILSP Youth who also receive CalFresh benefits 100 ILSP Cooking Class 8 WIOA Youth Program 9 Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Programs provide comprehensive services and support to young people between the ages of 14 and 24 who face barriers to education, training, and employment. WIOA youth programs aim to help young individuals develop the skills and experiences necessary to succeed in the workforce and pursue their career goals. Program Highlight FY 2022-23 $289,041 Spent by the WIOA Youth Program on paid work experience Measure X Youth Centers 10 Measure X Youth Centers 11 Timeline Youth Centers will offer a range of activities, programs, and classes for young people including media arts, health education, and employment and educational support. 6/23 Community Input 9/23 - 11/23 Request for Proposal (RFP) Development 12/23 BOS approval of Proposed Providers 1/24 Release RFP 5/24 Contract negotiations 7/24 Services Begin •Education and Skills Development •Career Exploration and Guidance •Work-Based Learning •Supportive Services •Leadership Development •Civic Engagement Programming •Youth aged 14- 24 Target Population •Contractor to provide regular reports to EHSD and monthly the Steering Committees regarding Youth and Community Engagement activities completed as well as emerging key themes and takeaways Community Input •Serve 25% of youth already served by EHSD programs in Year 1: o District 3 – 3,093 o District 4 – 2,135 o District 5 – 3,844 2024 Target Volume June 2023 Youth Kickoff Events 12 Serving Youth Across the County 13 Staff That Serve Youth 14 1,080 Number of EHSD staff in Bureaus that directly serve Youth* (August 2023) * Note: EHSD programs that serve age 14-24 youth include Medi-Cal, CalFresh, CalWORKs, Foster Care, KinGAP, Independent Living Skills Program, Adoption Assistance, and Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Youth Programs, and other supportive services. Calculated percentage based on % of customers served that are age 14-24. Youth Partner Story 15 Marla Stuart, MSW PhD Employment and Human Services Director info@ehsd.cccounty.us | 925-608-4800 Discussion Youth Served August 2023, September 25, 2023 16 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0481 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:REAPPOINT Dennisha Marsh to the At Large seat on the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee to a term that will expire on December 31, 2026, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. Attachments:1. Marsh, Dennisha (LMHAC), 2. Calbert, Arthur (LMHAC), 3. Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee News Release 10.16.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Internal Operations Committee Report Title:RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE LOS MEDANOS HEALTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: REAPPOINT Dennisha Marsh to the At Large seat on the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee to a new term that will expire on December 31, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: In 2018, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2018/436, which created the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) upon the dissolution of the Los Medanos Community Healthcare District. After a series court challenges and appeals, the District effectively dissolved on March 9, 2022. The Board formed the Advisory Committee to identify health disparities within the District's borders and to make recommendations related to a grant program to be conducted in the District's territory. The current composition of the Advisory Committee calls for (1) one At Large seat, to be interviewed by the Internal Operations Committee (IOC) and recommended to the full Board for appointment. The first Board appointee to the At Large seat on the Advisory Committee was Dennisha Marsh (Pittsburg), to a term that expired on December 31, 2023. In anticipation of the At Large seat vacancy, staff opened a four-week recruitment in October 2023. There were CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0481,Version:1 two applicants: incumbent Dennisha Marsh and Arthur Calbert, both residents of Pittsburg. Their applications are attached for reference. Both applicants were invited to be interviewed by the IOC at its special meeting on February 2; however, only Dennisha Marsh attended. In consideration of Ms. Marsh’s consistent and active participation during her first term of office, the IOC recommends her reappointment to a new term ending December 31, 2026. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Absent Board approval, the At Large seat will remain vacant and be unrepresented, pending further recruitment. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Submit Date: Nov 14, 2023 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 5 Length of Employment Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 40 Years Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee: Submitted Dennisha A Marsh Pittsburg CA 94565 RETIRED N/A Dennisha A Marsh Seat Name At-Large Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? 15 Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended Coppin State University Degree Type / Course of Study / Major BS Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Dennisha A Marsh Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. Dennisha serves on a number of city and county commissions and advisory committees. She currently serves on and is past Chair of the Pittsburg Community Advisory Commission, which advises the City and its Council on community services, including parks and recreation and public safety issues. She has been Chair of the Pittsburg Measure M Oversight Committee, and Pittsburg Community Block Grant and a CAC Advisor for the Youth Advisory Commission. For the Pittsburg Unified School District Dennisha has been a member of the District Advisory Council, Bond Oversight Committee, and Student Attendance Review Board. Dennisha previously was a member of the Economic Opportunity Council and Racial Justice Task Force. She currently serves on the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee for Contra Costa County, the successor to the Los Medanos Health District elected board, upon which she also served during its transition to County oversight. Mrs. Marsh's commitment to community service began as a personal appeal for equitable rights within the educational system. Mrs. Marsh's work is rooted in her desire to increase the visibility of marginalized groups in her community. Through this work she has cultivated communication skills that allow her to effectively communicate with groups at all levels. Dennisha has been instrumental in bridging communications among stakeholders in her community resulting in the reconstruction of educational facilities and the development of community gardens within all properties of the Pittsburg Unified School District. She also worked on summer STEM programs for youth, and obtaining new equipment and signage for local schools. Her advocacy has encouraged local road repairs and policies improving community safety on streets, street speed bumps, and development of a skateboard park in the City of Pittsburg. Dennisha participated in the community advocacy for the naming of Thurgood Marshall Regional Park, Home of the Port Chicago 50, and has participated in the Contra Costa Bar Association’s Task Force on the exoneration of the Port Chicago 50. Dennisha A Marsh Upload a Resume Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) Dennisha serves on a number of city and county commissions and advisory committees. She currently serves on and is past Chair of the Pittsburg Community Advisory Commission, which advises the City and its Council on community services, including parks and recreation and public safety issues. She has been Chair of the Pittsburg Measure M Oversight Committee, and Pittsburg Community Block Grant and a CAC Advisor for the Youth Advisory Commission. For the Pittsburg Unified School District Dennisha has been a member of the District Advisory Council, Bond Oversight Committee, and Student Attendance Review Board. Dennisha previously was a member of the Economic Opportunity Council and Racial Justice Task Force. She currently serves on the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee for Contra Costa County, the successor to the Los Medanos Health District elected board, upon which she also served during its transition to County oversight. Mrs. Marsh's commitment to community service began as a personal appeal for equitable rights within the educational system. Mrs. Marsh's work is rooted in her desire to increase the visibility of marginalized groups in her community. Through this work she has cultivated communication skills that allow her to effectively communicate with groups at all levels. Dennisha has been instrumental in bridging communications among stakeholders in her community resulting in the reconstruction of educational facilities and the development of community gardens within all properties of the Pittsburg Unified School District. She also worked on summer STEM programs for youth, and obtaining new equipment and signage for local schools. Her advocacy has encouraged local road repairs and policies improving community safety on streets, street speed bumps, and development of a skateboard park in the City of Pittsburg. Dennisha participated in the community advocacy for the naming of Thurgood Marshall Regional Park, Home of the Port Chicago 50, and has participated in the Contra Costa Bar Association’s Task Force on the exoneration of the Port Chicago 50. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: Los Medanos Health Advisory If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: Contra Costa Library Commission Dennisha A Marsh List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. Please see above Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information Dennisha A Marsh 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Dennisha A Marsh Submit Date: Dec 29, 2023 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 5 Length of Employment 23 years + Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 58 years Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee: Submitted Arthur S Calbert Pittsburg CA 94565 Retired Contra Costa County Department of Probation Arthur S Calbert Seat Name Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended Cal State East Bay Degree Type / Course of Study / Major B.S. Business Admin/Computer Information Systems Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Diablo Valley College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Geography Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Los Medanos College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Drone Technology Arthur S Calbert Upload a Resume Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A POST(Peace Officer Standards and Training Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B FAA Part 107 License Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. I would like to apply my work/school knowledge to improving the quality of life for our County/City/Unincorporated citizens. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) I was employed as a Institutional Supervisor for Contra Costa County for 23 years. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No Arthur S Calbert If Yes, please explain: Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. I'm currently a member of the Contra Costa County Grand Jury. Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Arthur S Calbert Important Information 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Arthur S Calbert Arthur Calbert Retired Contact Pittsburg, Ca. 94565 Objective I am interested in advancing my drone employability by immersing myself in various aspects of drone technology and obtain my part 107 drone license. Due to the enjoyable aspects of piloting drones, I know that a career in this field will not feel like a job because of the freedom you experience when you take flight. Education Cal State University, East Bay Hayward, Ca 94542 Bachelor of Science Computer Information Systems Graduated 1988 Ohlone College Fremont, Ca. 945539 Certificate of Accomplishment in Network Administrator (Ohlone College) earned 2021 Basic Drone Piloting (Los Medanos College) Remote Pilot Cert. Preparation (Los Medanos College) Part 107 Qualified Remote Pilot earned 06/07/2023 Key Skills Supervisory Employee Training Experience 06/20/95 – 09/11/2014 Juvenile Institution Officer (J.I.O) • Lead J.I.O • Contra Costa County Department of Probation Juvenile Institution Officer I’s are under direct supervision of the Lead Juvenile Institution Officer and/or Institutional Supervisor while they provide care and supervision to juveniles detained in a county institution. Juvenile Institution Officers may also be assigned to offer support, guidance and direction in a community setting. Juvenile Institution Officers are responsible and accountable for the security, custody and supervision of youthful offenders under the care of the Contra Costa County Probation Department, and complete related duties as required. 09/12/2014 – 07/10/2018 (Retired) Institutional Supervisor • Institutional Supervisor 1 • Contra Costa Department of Probation First line supervisors over Juvenile Institution Officers engaged in the care and custody of detained/committed youth. At Juvenile Hall, incumbents function as a shift supervisor and work under the direction of the on-duty Institutional Supervisor II; in the absence of the Institutional Supervisor II and during the graveyard shift they act as facility supervisor. At the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility, positions are responsible for daily operation of the facility and supervision of staff. The classification may also be assigned to continuum of care programs in the Probation Department. C.P.R Instructor Leadership Techniques. Key Skills Accepted methods of Supervision Prepare clear and concise reports Can Utilize good interpersonal relations . Communication While employed with the Contra Costa County Department of Probation I was assigned the duty of orientating staff and constituents on daily rules and expectations. Other duties included interacting with judges, attorneys, community-based organizations and parents. Leadership I am currently a member of our community’s homeowners association. References Professor Jeffrey Miller – Los Medanos College JeMiller@losmedanos.edu Contra Costa County County Administrator’s Office • 1025 Escobar Street • Martinez, CA 94553 • www.contracosta.ca.gov NEWS RELEASE Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea, Sr. Deputy Oct. 16, 2023 County Administrator’s Office (925) 655-2056 Julie.Enea@cao.cccounty.us WOULD YOU LIKE TO SERVE ON THE LOS MEDANOS HEALTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE? The Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee was established by the Board of Supervisors in July 2018 as part of plan to dissolve the Los Medanos Community Healthcare District, increasing funding available for healthcare programming in the Pittsburg/Bay Point areas. The Committee is charged with development of an area health plan to determine specific health needs of the community, identify priorities to address those needs and facilitate a request for proposals process to make funding recommendations for health programs in the community to the Board of Supervisors. The Committee includes representatives from the local community and medical practitioners, making this a unique opportunity for collaboration. The County is recruiting volunteers to fill one vacancy in the “At Large” seat for the three-year term of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2026. The County Board of Supervisors will make the appointment following a screening process conducted by the Board’s Internal Operations Committee. Residents and those that work in the territory of the District, which is primarily the Pittsburg/Bay Point area, are welcome to apply. This is a volunteer appointment - no stipends or reimbursements are authorized for this Committee. Application forms can be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 655-2000 or the application can be completed online by visiting the County website at https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418. Applications should be returned to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, County Administration Building, 1025 Escobar St., Martinez, CA 94553 no later than by 5 p.m. on Friday, November 17, 2023. Applicants should plan to be available for public interviews to be conducted virtually via Zoom on Thursday, December 14, 2023. More information about the Los Medanos Health Advisory Committee can be found in the authorizing resolution, available at http://64.166.146.245/docs/2018/BOS/20180710_1118/34028_Resolution%202018 -436%20Final.pdf or by contacting committee staff, Ernesto De La Torre, at ernesto.delatorre@cchealth.org. #### 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0482 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/26/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:REAPPOINT Shawn Stappen to an At Large Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. Attachments:1. Shawn M Stappen (AAC) Redacted Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Airports Committee Report Title:Reappoint Shawn M. Stappen to an At Large Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: REAPPOINT Shawn Stappen to an At Large Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC)to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact BACKGROUND: The AAC provides a forum for the Director of Airports regarding airport policy matters. The AAC is comprised of thirteen members appointed by the Board of Supervisors who must work and/or reside in Contra Costa County.The membership of the AAC consists of:1)one member nominated by each of the five members of the Board of Supervisors;2)one member nominated by the City of Concord;3)one member nominated by the City of Pleasant Hill;4)one member nominated by the Contra Costa County Airport Business Association;5)one member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives in the vicinity of Buchanan Field Airport;6)one member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives in the vicinity of the Byron Airport;and 7)three At Large members nominated by the Airport Committee representing the general community. The Airport Committee conducted interviews during its January 22,2024,meeting and recommended the reappointment of Shawn M.Stappen to an At Large Seat with a term beginning March 1,2024,and ending on February 28, 2027. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0482,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The At Large Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee will remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0483 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/29/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:REAPPOINT Dean Hickman-Smith to the Aviation Advisory Committee, Byron Neighbor Seat to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. Attachments:1. Hickman-Smith Dean (AAC) Redacted Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Airports Committee Report Title:Reappoint Dean J. Hickman-Smith to the Aviation Advisory Committee, Byron Neighbor Seat ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: REAPPOINT Dean Hickman-Smith to the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC),Byron Neighbor Seat to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact BACKGROUND: The AAC provides a forum for the Director of Airports regarding airport policy matters. The AAC is comprised of thirteen members appointed by the Board of Supervisors who must work and/or reside in Contra Costa County.The membership of the AAC consists of:1)one member nominated by each of the five members of the Board of Supervisors;2)one member nominated by the City of Concord;3)one member nominated by the City of Pleasant Hill;4)one member nominated by the Contra Costa County Airport Business Association;5)one member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives in the vicinity of Buchanan Field Airport;6)one member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives in the vicinity of the Byron Airport;and 7)three At Large members nominated by the Airport Committee representing the general community. The Airport Committee conducted interviews during its January 22,2024,meeting and recommended the reappointment of Dean J.Hickman-Smith to the Byron Neighbor Seat with a term beginning March 1,2024,and ending on February 28, 2027. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0483,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Byron Neighbor Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee will remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Submit Date: Jul 28, 2022 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 1 Length of Employment 2 months Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 2 years Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Aviation Advisory Committee: Submitted Dean Hickman-Smith Byron CA 94514 Incode Technologies Chief Revenue Officer Dean J Hickman-Smith Seat Name Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * None of the above College/ University A Name of College Attended France Hill School, UK Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Advanced Level Physics, Geographyy Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Bristol Polytechnic, UK Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Electronic Engineering Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Royal Air Force College Cranwell Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Officer Training Dean J Hickman-Smith Upload a Resume Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A FAA Commercial Pilot Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B IAC Aerobatics Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Intermediate and Advanced Aerobatics. Numerous Competitions. Placed 3rd in the US West International Aerobatics Competition at KTCY this year. Royal Air Force Flying Officer. Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. I am a local competitive aerobatic pilot and would like to see sustained commitment to developing a thriving flying and training operation within the Contra Costa airport community. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) I am a competitive aerobatic pilot and aircraft co-owner. I also have extensive business experience in the technology sector. I was also an Officer in the UK Royal Air Force Reserve. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No Dean J Hickman-Smith If Yes, please explain: I have business commitments that require overseas travel occasionally. With planning I can avoid conflict. Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. I have been a volunteer glider tow pilot for 7 years with Norcal soaring at C83. Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Dean J Hickman-Smith Important Information 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Dean J Hickman-Smith 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0484 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:REAPPOINT Rachel Rosekind to the District I seat on the Library Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2028, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Report Title:REAPPOINT Rachel Rosekind to the District I seat on the Library Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2028, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: REAPPOINT Rachel Rosekind to the District I seat on the Library Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2028, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The Commission serves in an advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors and the County Librarian; provides a forum for the community to provide input concerning Library operations, and recommends proposals to the Board of Supervisors and the County Librarian which may improve the Library. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The appointment would not be made and the District would not have representation on the commission. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0485 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:REAPPOINT Richard Celestre to the City of Pleasant Hill seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring on February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Pleasant Hill City Council. Attachments:1. Celestre Reappt to Pleasant Hill Seat on the AAC Redacted Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Greg Baer, Director of Airports Report Title:Reappoint Richard Celestre to the City of Pleasant Hill Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: REAPPOINT Richard Celestre to the City of Pleasant Hill seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC)to a term beginning March 1,2024,and expiring on February 28,2027,as recommended by the Pleasant Hill City Council. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The AAC provides a forum for the Director of Airports regarding policy matters at and around the airport. The AAC comprises 13 members who must work and/or reside in Contra Costa County:one appointed by each Supervisor;one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Concord;one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Pleasant Hill;one from and nominated to the Board by the Contra Costa County Airports Business Association; one from the community of Pacheco and nominated to the Board by the Airport Committee;one from the vicinity of Byron Airport (Brentwood,Byron,Knightsen or Discovery Bay)and nominated to the Board by the Airport Committee; and three at large to represent the general community, to be nominated by the Airport Committee. On February 5,2024,the Pleasant Hill City Council approved forwarding a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to reappoint Richard Celestre as the representative on the Aviation Advisory Committee for a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring on February 28, 2027. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0485,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The City of Pleasant Hill Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee will remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0486 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ACCEPT the resignation of Floy Andrews, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I seat on the Assessment Appeals board for a term ending on September 1, 2024 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. Attachments:1. Vacancy Notice.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Report Title:DECLARE vacant the District I seat on the Assessment Appeals Board ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the resignation of Floy Andrews, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I seat on the Assessment Appeals Board for a term ending on September 1, 2024, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The Assessment Appeals Board is established to assess and equalize the valuation of the taxable property in the County for the purpose of taxation; and to perform all duties required by the State Board of Equalization and State law. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat would not be declared vacant and a new recruitment/appointment would not be made, resulting in potential quorum issues. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0486,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/1/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0487 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ACCEPT the resignation of Emilie F. Whelan, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I 1st alternate seat on the El Sobrante Municipal Advisory Council for a term ending on December 31, 2026 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. Attachments:1. Vacancy Notice.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Report Title:DECLARE vacant the District I 1st alternate seat on the El Sobrante Municipal Advisory Council ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the resignation of Emilie F. Whelan, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I 1st alternate seat on the El Sobrante Municipal Advisory Council for a term ending on December 31, 2026 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The El Sobrante Municipal Advisory Council provides input to the Board of Supervisors, the County Planning Commission, and the Zoning Administrator on land use issues and other concerns affecting the unincorporated community of El Sobrante CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat would not be declared vacant, and a new recruitment/appointment would not be completed resulting in potential quorum issues. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0487,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0488 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Thomas Fenster to the Public Member #1 seat and Dr. Jutta Burger to the Public Member #2 seat on the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee for terms that will expire on December 31, 2027, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. Attachments:1. 2024 0202 Memo to IOC re 2 public seats, 2. Burger, Jutta (IPMAC), 3. Fenster, Thomas (IPMAC) Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Internal Operations Committee Report Title:RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Thomas Fenster to the Public Member #1 seat and Dr. Jutta Burger to the Public Member #2 seat on the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee for terms that will expire on December 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Board Resolutions 2020/1 and 2 stipulate that applicants for At Large/Non Agency-Specific seats on specified bodies are to be interviewed by a Board subcommittee. The Resolutions further permit a Board Committee to select a screening committee to assist in interviewing applicants for appointment. Upon review of the eligible seats, the IOC made a determination that it would conduct interviews for At Large seats on the following bodies: Retirement Board, Fire Advisory Commission, Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, Treasury Oversight Committee, Airport Land Use Commission, and the Fish & Wildlife Committee; and that screening and nomination fill At Large seats on all other eligible bodies would be delegated each body or a subcommittee thereof. The Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Advisory Committee was established by the Board of Supervisors in November 2009 to advise the Board regarding the protection and enhancement of public health, County resources, and the environment related to pest control methods employed by County departments. The IPM Committee has eight voting members as follows: two ex-officio members (Health Services Department and County/Unincorporated County Storm Water Program) and six public members (one County Sustainability Commission representative, one County Fish and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0488,Version:1 Wildlife Committee representative, one At Large Environmental Organization representative, and three At Large Public Member appointees); plus one Public Member Alternate seat. The following seats became vacant on December 31, 2023: At Large 1 and At Large 2. Seat terms are four years and new appointments will expire on December 31, 2027. Attached is a memo from the IPM Advisory Committee Chair and the IPM Coordinator transmitting the two applications received from the recruitment for the vacancies and describing the recruitment process, and the current Committee roster. The IOC met with both applicants at a special meeting on February 2. Since there were two well-qualified applicants for two vacancies, the IOC recommends appointment of both applicants. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Absent Board approval, the seats will remain vacant pending further recruitment. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 4585 Pacheco Blvd., Suite 100 | Martinez, CA 94553 | Phone: (925) 655-3200 cchealth.org Date: February 2, 2024 To: Internal Operations Committee Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Diane Burgis, Vice Chair From: Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee (IPMAC) Dr. Kimberly Hazard, Chair Wade Finlinson, Staff to Committee Subject: Two Public Member Appointments to the IPM Advisory Committee On December 31, 2023, the terms for two At Large seats ended. Those seats include Public Member #1 (previously held by Susan Captain of Moraga) and Public Member #2 (previously held by Stephen Prée of Richmond). On October 19, 2023 the IPM Coordinator sent the vacancy announcement to the Clerk of the Board for posting. It was also announced in the November 18, 2023 meeting of the IPM Advisory Committee. Supervisors Burgis, Carlson, Andersen, and Gioia included the announcement in district newsletters. The announcement was posted on the IPM website from October 20, 2023 through January 25, 2024. The IPM Coordinator also shared the announcement with 36 individuals in the community who have experience with various IPM operations. Two applications were received, and we recommend filling the seats as follows: • Public Member #1: Thomas Fenster, Richmond (current Public Member Alternate on IPMAC) • Public Member #2: Dr. Jutta Burger, Martinez A roster of the current membership is on the following page with expiring seats highlighted in yellow. Both outgoing members did not apply for reappointment. 2 Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee Roster Seat Title Appointee Name City of Residence/Primary Work Location Term Expiration Voting? Public Member 1 – Type 2 At Large VACANT December 31, 2027 YES Public Member 2 – Type 2 At Large VACANT December 31, 2027 YES Public Member 3 – Type 2 At Large Susanna Thompson Brentwood December 31, 2026 YES Environmental Organization – Type 3 At Large Seat Roxana Lucero Pittsburg December 31, 2026 YES Sustainability Commission Representative Kimberly Hazard Richmond March 31, 2025 YES Public Member – Fish and Wildlife Committee Representative Susan Heckly Pleasant Hill February 28, 2026 YES Public Member Alternate Thomas Fenster Richmond December 31, 2026 Only if public member/Sust. rep/F&W rep is absent County/Unincorporated County Stormwater Program Representative Michele Mancuso Martinez None YES Health Services Department Representative Sara Levin Martinez None YES Agriculture Commissioner or Designee Gabe Chan Concord None NO Public Works Deputy Director or Designee Chris Lau Martinez None NO Public Works Facilities Director or Designee Dave Lavelle Martinez None NO County Pest Management Contractor Carlos Agurto Antioch December 31, 2023 NO First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 5 Length of Employment 5 years Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 4 years Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee: Submitted Jutta C Burger Martinez CA 94553 California Invasive Plant Council Science Program Director Jutta C Burger Seat Name Public Member Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended Washington State University Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Biology Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended University of Nebraska Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Masters Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended University of California - Riverside Jutta C Burger Upload a Resume Degree Type / Course of Study / Major PhD Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A Certified Pesticide Applicator Training Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. I'm interested in serving on this board both because I am a member of this community who is interested in environmental issues and because of my professional and personal concern about invasive plants, their impacts, and their control. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) Please see attached biosketch Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Jutta C Burger Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: I know of none at present. Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. Technical Advisory Committee, Nature Reserve of Orange County, Orange County, CA Plant Risk Evaluator Technical Advisory Committee Member of Friends of Alhambra Creek Member and past board member / chapter secretary of California Native Plant Society - Orange County Chapter Member and secretary of Calflora Board of Directors Member and board secretary of Chavez Park Conservancy Board of Directors Staff and past board president of California Invasive Plant Council Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Jutta C Burger Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Jutta C Burger BIOSKETCH Jutta C. Burger, Science Program Director, California Invasive Plant Council, , EDUCATION 2006 Ph.D. Plant Biology, University of California-Riverside CA, Advisor: Dr. N.C. Ellstrand 1994 M.S. Biology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln NE, Advisor: Dr. S.M. Louda 1991 B.S. Biology, Botany Option, Washington State University-Pullman WA EXPERIENCE 2018-present Science Program Director, California Invasive Plant Council, Berkeley CA 2013-2018 Managing Director, Science and Stewardship, Irvine Ranch Conservancy, Irvine CA Oversaw resource management, monitoring, and research, including a large-scale restoration and invasive control program spanning over 30,000 acres. 2011-2013 Co-Director, Science and Stewardship, Irvine Ranch Conservancy, Irvine CA Oversaw resource management and monitoring of natural lands for three land owners. Managed invasive control program; oversaw restoration and native seed farm operations, as well as wildlife, human impacts, habitat monitoring programs. 2008-2011 Senior Field Ecologist, Irvine Ranch Conservancy, Irvine CA Managed invasive species control program, wildlife and human impacts monitoring, and volunteer stewardship program. Co-developed restoration and resilience initiative for managed areas. Established native seed farm for restorations. 2007-2008 Field Ecologist, Irvine Ranch Conservancy, Irvine CA Managed invasive control program. Oversaw completion of Resource Management Plan. Developed and implemented volunteer lead land stewardship program. 2006-2007 Postdoctoral Researcher, Dr. John M. Burke, Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens. Studied crop gene movement into wild relatives on invasiveness in annual sunflower (Helianthus annuus). 2002-2006 Graduate Research Associate, Dr. Norman C. Ellstrand, Department of Botany and Plant Sciences. University of California-Riverside. Dissertation: Genetic correlates to invasiveness in weedy cereal rye (Secale cereale). 1995-2002 Staff Research Associate, Department of Entomology. University of California- Riverside. Insect community ecology and conservation, including study of food resources of California Gnatcatcher, coastal sage scrub arthropod and plant community structure and the effects fire and invasive species on them. 1991-1994 Graduate Researcher, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Nebraska- Lincoln. Masters Thesis: Cumulative effects of competition and insect herbivory on Opuntia fragilis (Cactaceae). RECENT GRANTS AWARDED (since 2020) 2022-2024 DPR Alliance grant: Mainstreaming Effective Herbicide Calibration for Wildland Weed Work. $159,493 2023 Western IPM Work Group Grant for Western States’ Invasive Plant Risk Assessment Network. $29,952 2022 Western IPM Work Group Grant for Expanding Continuity and Capacity in Invasive Plant Risk Assessments across Western States. $32,200 2021-2024 DPR Alliance grant: Best Management Approaches for Herbicide-Based Approaches to Invasive Plant Management. $289,291 2021-2024 WCB Climate Resilience Program grant: Protecting Central Coast Habitat for Listed Plant Species, Santa Cruz, San Benito, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties, California. $120,000 2021 Western IPM Outreach and Implementation Grant for Building Continuity across State Invasive Plant Lists: Predicting Invasion Risk of Horticultural Plants. $24,960 2020-2023 California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service / U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Joint Section 6 Endangered Species Recovery Program Grant: Protecting Rare Plants from Invasive Plants (Central Coast, CA). $217,375 SYNERGISTIC ACTIVITIES • Coordinating non-chemical and chemical weed management techniques BMP and WeedCUT Decision Support Tool development with UC IPM and topical experts across the state for California Department of Pesticide Regulation (2018-present) • Managing the Cal-IPC Invasive Plant Inventory (2018-present) • Co-leading Western IPM-funded work group for Plant Risk Assessments (2021-present) • Organized and recruited for symposium program with Board of Directors committee for 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 Cal-IPC Symposium • Serving on Board of Directors for two non-profit environmental organizations (Calflora and Chavez Parks Conservancy) • Presented on WIPM Work Group at Oregon Noxious Weed Conference (2023) • Presented on invasive plant issue at multiple venues (2022 WWSS; 2019, 2022 CDFW Symposium; 2020 Sonoma State University Center for Environ. Inq.; 2019-2023 Cal-IPC Symposium, 2019 Forest Pest Council, 2018 UC Irvine Workshop on Ecological Management and Research, 2018 California Weed Science Society • Served on Board of Directors for California Invasive Plant Council 2013-2018 (Secretary 2014-2016, President 2016-2017) • Served on Board of Directors and as Emerging Invasives Program co-chair for Orange County Chapter of California Native Plant Society 2014-2018 • Served on Technical Advisory Committee for Nature Reserve of Orange Co. 2011-2018 • Served as Research Associate at UC Irvine and UC Riverside 2009-2018 • Organized monthly “Science Friday” seminar series for volunteers and staff at Irvine Ranch Conservancy 2008-2018 • Developed and taught volunteer land steward and lead land steward training at Irvine Ranch Conservancy, 2008-2013 Publication list available upon request First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 1 Length of Employment 4 years Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 1 year Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee: Submitted Thomas L D Fenster RICHMOND CA 94801 Ecdysis Foundation PhD Student and Project Leader Thomas L D Fenster Seat Name Public Member Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended Pomona College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Environmental Analysis - Policy Emphasis Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended California State University East Bay Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Master of Science - Biology Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended University of California, Davis Thomas L D Fenster Upload a Resume Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Current PhD student in the Horticulture and Agronomy Program with an agroecology focus Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. I think I could add some useful insights into the way Contra Costa County can integrate a holistic IPM approach across County property. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) I'm a research scientist exploring how our agricultural landscapes can be agroecologically intensified, while maintaining or improving productivity. Part of my Master's research examined IPM strategies in Almond orchards and part of my PhD research is looking at IPM strategies in vineyards. I have also conducted research in rangelands, but that research had an emphasis on carbon sequestration. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Thomas L D Fenster Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: It is possible I may have to conduct field work during the March meeting. Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. Community outreach team member and coordinator for the Alameda County Waste Management Authority (2013-2019). Engagement with commercial farms on ways to increase the sustainability and resiliency of their operations. Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Thomas L D Fenster Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information 1.This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2.All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3.Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4.Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5.Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6.Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7.As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Thomas L D Fenster Tommy Fenster EDUCATION University of California, Davis–Davis, CA Current GPA: 3.92/4.0 PhD in Horticulture and Agronomy (Department of Plant Sciences): Expected May 2025 California State University East Bay–Hayward, CA GPA: 3.98/4.0 Master of Science in Biological Sciences: May 2021 Pomona College – Claremont, CA GPA: 3.55/4.0 Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Analysis: May 2011 4-year Varsity Football participant. 3-year starter at cornerback, Selected to the SCIAC Academic All-League Football Team for the 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 football seasons, 2011 inductee into the National Football Foundation Hampshire Honor Society, Sustainability Action Fellow Relevant Experience PhD Student with the Ecdysis Foundation and the Gaudin Lab at UC Davis: Estelline, SD & Davis, CA 06/2021-Present •Quantify multifunctional outcomes of sheep grazing along a regenerative-conventional co-management gradient in California's vineyards and orchards •Utilize a systems-level approach to quantify the interactions occurring among the chemical, physical, biological, and economic components of vineyard systems •Establish and maintain relationships with private producers, government agencies, and non-profit organizations to conduct research and do outreach events MS Student with the Ecdysis Foundation, the Oikawa Lab at Cal State East Bay, and the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab: Estelline, SD, Hayward, CA, and Berkeley CA 08/2017- 06/2021 •My primary advisors were Dr. Jon Lundgren who heads Ecdysis Foundation, Dr. Oikawa at Cal State East Bay, and Dr. Housen Chu at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab •My thesis compared eight regenerative and eight conventional almond orchards at the systems level. It examined differences in total soil carbon and nitrogen 0-6,000 Mg ESM layer (~0-60cm), water infiltration, bulk density, microbial biomass and diversity, epigeal invertebrate biomass and diversity, pest damage, almond nutrient density, and profitability •Established and maintained relationships with private producers, to conduct research and do outreach events at those farms •Led a team of three undergraduates to complete field and lab work pertaining to my projects •Dr. Oikawa’s lead graduate student for our lab’s role on the following project: Working Lands Innovation Center (WLIC) —Catalyzing Negative Carbon Emissions •For the WLIC project worked with Dr. Oikawa and Dr. Chu to wire and build the eddy covariance tower and to monitor the differences in CO2, H2O, between the compost amendment treatment footprint and the control footprint Community Outreach Team Member for StopWaste: Oakland, CA, 09/2013-May 2019 (Until July 2017 when I began graduate school, I was the outreach coordinator.) •Partnered with urban agriculture groups in Alameda County to lead community workshops on composting and its benefits with regards to building soil health, decreasing irrigation, and combating climate change •Provided Alameda County urban agriculture groups with technical assistance with regards to establishing on farm composting operations and building healthy soil via compost, cover cropping, and crop rotations •Conceived and initiated StopWaste’ Alameda County urban farm study. Quantified organic matter, TSC/TSN (0- 45cm), microbial activity, macro/micronutrients, water infiltration, and bulk density • Coordinated with Alameda/Contra Costa County UCANR Urban Agriculture Advisor, Rob Bennaton to conduct the above activities • Instructor for the StopWaste Environmental Educator Training program • Led and organized community workshops on sustainable landscaping regarding converting lawns to edible and native landscapes • Moved the Community Outreach Grant program from its pilot phase (2 grantees in one year) to program status. Reviewed, administered, and managed ~12 grants per year (45 during my tenure) • Established relationships with 122 groups, personally engaging over 17,388 people at 284 events, 138 of which have been workshops • Trained community groups in StopWaste messaging and protocol, resulting in them engaging 42,628 individuals • Served on the review panel for StopWaste’s large grants-to-nonprofits (Grants up to 65k) • Started the StopWaste Instagram • Established and managed the StopWaste murals program which worked with local artists and community groups to create murals that highlight the contributions of BIPOC communities to composting and composting’s link to soil health and environmental justice Grants Awarded • $30,000 grant from Patagonia to complete my MS thesis project comparing regenerative and conventional almond orchards (Awarded 2/22/2019) • $25,000 USDA Western SARE Graduate Student Grant in Sustainable Agriculture to complete my MS thesis project comparing regenerative and conventional almond orchards (GW19-193, Awarded 8/21/2019) • $19,860 awarded via the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab-CSUEB Internship Program for the project- The effects of compost application on grazed grasslands’ greenhouse gas budget, water budget, net primary productivity, and microbial communities (Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, 06/2019-05/2020) Manuscripts • Fenster, T.L.D., C.E. LaCanne, J.R. Pecenka, R.B. Schmid, M.M. Bredeson, K. Busentiz, A. Michels, K.D. Welch, J.G. Lundgren. Defining and validating regenerative farm systems using a composite of ranked agricultural practices. Faculty1000 Research • Fenster, T.L.D., P.Y. Oikawa, and J.G. Lundgren. Regenerative almond production systems improve soil health, biodiversity, and profit. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems • Fenster, T.L.D., H. Chu, and P.Y. Oikawa. The effects of compost application on grazed grasslands’ greenhouse gas budget, water budget, net primary productivity, and microbial communities. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, in prep • Fenster, T. L. D. and C. B. Fenster. 1996. Plethodon cinereus (Red Back Salamander). Predation. Herpetological Review, 27: 194 Relevant Skills • Conduct field work and collect samples in agricultural settings, while leading a team of undergraduates • Build, wire, and maintain an Eddy Covariance tower. Conduct chamber measurements • Lab work and statistical analyses pertaining to research • R Studio- General linear mixed models, general additive models, multivariate analyses, bootstrapping, hierarchical clustering, co-occurrence networks, construction of figures and summary reports Graduate Coursework UC Davis and California State University, East Bay Horticulture and Agronomic Principles, Plant Genetics, Plant Root Biology, Grapevine Pests, Diseases, and Disorders, Viticulture Practices, Ecology and Agriculture, Research Perspectives in Horticulture and Agronomy, Vine Growth and Physiology, Horticulture and Agronomic Practices, Sustainable Nutrient Management, Soil Ecology, Community Ecology, Biology of Fungi, Evolutionary Biology, Microbial Symbioses, Environmental Microbiology, Restoration Ecology and Carbon Sequestration, The Science of Soils, Intro to R for Data Science, Chemistry 111, Chemistry 112 , Physics 125, BIOL 690- Independent Study, Thesis Short Courses • Flux Course 2019: Rocky Mountain Field Station, July 15-26, 2019. Course topics: flux measurements at the leaf & soil level; modeling leaf CO2 and H2O fluxes; eddy covariance measurements; predictions of fluxes from satellite observations; canopy flux models; assimilation of flux observations and satellite remote sensing data into ecosystem process models; and Bayesian approaches to modeling • Applied Agroecology: Strategizing Science to Address Farmers’ Needs: Oak Lakes Field Station, June 17-21, 2019 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0489 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Lisa Martell to the Environmental Organization #2 Seat, Rohan Tyagi to the Environmental Organization #2 Alternate Seat, Tim Bancroft to the General Public Seat, Jim Payne to the Labor #2 Seat, and Nick Plurkowski to the Labor #2 Alternate Seat on the Hazardous Materials Commission, all to terms that will expire on December 31, 2027, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. Attachments:1. Application -Charles Davidson_HazMat, 2. Application -NIcholas Plurkowski_HazMat, 3. Application -Tim Bancroft_HazMat, 4. Application_Jim Payne_HazMat, 5. Application_Johnson, Theresa_HazMat, 6. Application_Martell, Lisa_HazMat, 7. Application_Tyagi, Rohan_HazMat, 8. HMC 2024 Roster, 2,1,24, 9. CC Labor Council nomination letter for Jim Payne and Nicholas Plurkowski, 10. HMC nomination letter for Martell, 1,24,24, 11. Sustainable Contra Costa nomination letter for Rohan Tyagi, Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Internal Operations Committee Report Title: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENTS TO THE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Lisa Martell to the Environmental Organization #2 Seat, Rohan Tyagi to the Environmental Organization #2 Alternate Seat, Tim Bancroft to the General Public Seat, Jim Payne to the Labor #2 Seat, and Nick Plurkowski to the Labor #2 Alternate Seat on the Hazardous Materials Commission, all to terms that will expire on December 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Hazardous Materials Commission was established in 1986 to advise the Board, County Staff and the mayors, council members, and staffs of the cities within the County, on issues related to the development, approval, and administration of the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Specifically, the Board charged the Commission with drafting a Hazardous Materials Storage and Transportation Plan and Ordinance, coordinating the implementation of the Hazardous Materials Release Response Plan and inventory program, and to analyze and develop recommendations regarding hazards materials issues with consideration to broad CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0489,Version:1 public input, and report back to the Board on matters referred to the Commission. The Commission recruited to fill five vacant seats: ·Environmental Organization #2 ·Environmental Organization #2 Alternate ·General Public ·Labor #2 ·Labor #2 Alternate The new terms for all these seats will end on December 31, 2027. Environmental Organization Seats. The terms for Environmental Organization #2 Seat and its alternate expired on December 31, 2023. The bylaws of the Hazardous Materials Commission provide for two “Environmental Organization” seats to be nominated by an environmental organization, but that no particular environmental organization will have an exclusive right to nominate an individual to any one of the two aforesaid seats or their alternates, and therefore, which environmental organizations are represented on the Hazardous Materials Commission rests with the Internal Operations Committee and ultimately the Board of Supervisors. The Hazardous Materials Commission recruited for the open Environmental Organization #2 Seat and its alternate and received three qualifying applications. At its January 25, 2024 meeting, the Commission unanimously voted to recommend Lisa Martell for Environmental Organization #2 Seat and Rohan Tyagi for Environmental Organization #2 Alternate Seat. The applications and letters of support for each recommended candidate and the other candidate that applied are attached. General Public Seat. The term for the General Public Seat expired on December 31, 2023. The bylaws of the Hazardous Materials Commission provide for one representative of the general public, to be appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The Hazardous Materials Commission recruited for the open General Public Seat and received three qualifying applications for this seat. At its January 25, 2024 meeting, the Commission unanimously voted to recommend Tim Bancroft for the General Public Seat. The application for Mr. Bancroft and the other candidates that applied are attached. Labor Seats. The terms for Labor #2 Seat and its alternate expired on December 31, 2023. The bylaws of the Hazardous Materials Commission provide for two labor representatives, nominated by labor organizations, screened by the Internal Operations Committee, and appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The Contra Costa Labor Council nominated Jim Payne for Labor #2 Seat and Nick Plurkowski for Labor #2 Alternate Seat. Their applications and letter of support are attached. The Internal Operations Committee, at a special meeting on February 2, reviewed the Hazardous Materials Commission recommendations as well as all of the applications and endorsements received, and supports the Commission’s recommendations. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seats will remain vacant, necessitating new recruitment. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0489,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ !"!! !& ! "# ϭϬϮϱƐĐŽďĂƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϭƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ !&(/-.., !)+*"!%*" Contra Costa County ŽǇŽƵǁŽƌŬŝŶŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇ͍ ( !!!%WŽƐƚĂů ƌŝŵĂƌǇW) !"!%"*ĚĚƌĞƐƐ ! "# !!;ŝĨŽƵƚŽĨŽƵŶƚǇ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĞŶƚĞƌEͬͿ͗ /ĨzĞƐ͕ŝŶǁŚŝĐŚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚĚŽǇŽƵǁŽƌŬ͍ BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION &ŝƌƐƚEĂŵĞDŝĚĚůĞ/ŶŝƚŝĂů>ĂƐƚEĂŵĞ KĐĐƵƉĂƚŝŽŶĂů>ŝĐĞŶƐĞƐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͗ ***!ĐĂƚĞ EŽ ĞŐƌĞĞdǇƉĞͬ" !"%'$ # ! !! %!! EŽ ^ƚĂƚĞ ĞƌƚŝĨŝĐĂƚĞǁĂƌĚĞĚĨŽƌdƌĂŝŶŝŶŐ͍ EŽ )zĞƐEŽ zĞ ($%' ŚĞĐŬĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞďŽǆŝĨǇŽƵƉŽƐƐĞƐƐŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ͗ 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 ƵƌƌĞŶƚŵƉůŽǇĞƌ:ŽďdŝƚůĞ >ĞŶŐƚŚŽĨŵƉůŽǇŵĞŶƚ ,ŽǁůŽŶŐŚĂǀĞǇŽƵůŝǀĞĚŽƌǁŽƌŬĞĚŝŶŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇ͍ ŽĂƌĚ͕ŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͕ŽƌŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ ! ,ĂǀĞǇŽƵĞǀĞƌĂƚƚĞŶĚĞĚĂŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵĂƌĞĂƉƉůǇŝŶŐ͍ KƚŚĞƌdƌĂŝŶŝŶŐƐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͗ EŽ ŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŽƌdŽŽů zĞƐtŽƵůĚǇŽƵůŝŬĞƚŽďĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĨŽƌĂƉƉŽŝŶƚŵĞŶƚƚŽŽƚŚĞƌĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĚŝĞƐĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŵĂǇďĞƋƵĂůŝĨŝĞĚ͍ ƌĞǇŽƵĂǀĞƚĞƌĂŶŽĨƚŚĞh͘^͘ƌŵĞĚ&ŽƌĐĞƐ͍ĞƐ ŽǇŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶǇŽďůŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŚĂƚŵŝŐŚƚĂĨĨĞĐƚǇŽƵƌĂƚƚĞŶĚĂŶĐĞĂƚƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐ͍ /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĞǆƉůĂŝŶ͗ zĞƐ Charles Davidson Hercules 94547 5 University of Michigan Biology/Pre-med University of California - Berkeley Biochemistry/Virology/Immunolog Wayne State University Medical imagingphysics and Can Hazardous Materials Commission Environmental Maybe 20 (In person and Zo Print Form ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ J. CA 14 years Retired ✔ ✔ ✔ ĞƐĐƌŝďĞǇŽƵƌƋƵĂůŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌƚŚŝƐĂƉƉŽŝŶƚŵĞŶƚ͘;EKd͗ǇŽƵŵĂǇĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂĐŽƉǇŽĨǇŽƵƌƌĞƐƵŵĞͿ͘ WůĞĂƐĞĐŚĞĐŬŽŶĞ͗" /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞůŝƐƚƚŚĞŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ;ƐͿŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵĂƌĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇƐĞƌǀŝŶŐ͗ ")" /"("#'##$!#!#") ŽƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŝƉƐ͍ -"!!#ƚŚĞƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŝƉƐ ůŝƐƚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞΗ/ŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΗƐĞĐƚŝŽŶŽŶƉĂŐĞϯŽĨƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ!"$#E*31Ϯϭ+Ϯϯϰ.͘ >ŝƐƚĂŶǇǀŽůƵŶƚĞĞƌĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇĞǆƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶǇďŽĂƌĚƐŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƐĞƌǀĞĚ͘ /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĂůƐŽůŝƐƚƚŚĞŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ;ƐͿŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐůǇƐĞƌǀĞĚ͗ ")" /"("#'##$!#!#") /ĂŵŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐŵǇƌĞƐƵŵĞǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͗ ) zĞƐ EŽ ƌĞǇŽƵĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇŽƌŚĂǀĞǇŽƵĞǀĞƌďĞĞŶĂƉƉŽŝŶƚĞĚƚŽĂŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ͍ 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 WůĞĂƐĞĞǆƉůĂŝŶǁŚǇǇŽƵǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽƐĞƌǀĞŽŶƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌďŽĂƌĚ͕ĐŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͕ŽƌĐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘ 1) Sunflower Alliance, a non-paid environmental-oriented and community-oriented activity (10-years) 2) Rodeo Citizens Association, a 30-year old community organization dedicated to the well being of the environmental and well-being of Rodeo residents. (2-years) Sustainability Commission ✔ ✔ ✔ I believe that I have an adequate technical and scientific background to contribute to the Hazardous Materials Commission in a substantive way. Importantly, I believe that my graduate academic level background allows me the capacity to look beyond my own ideas and even to seek out information that needs greater expertise than myself. That is, perhaps, a most critical piece of the scientific method, that is, be willing to go beyond oneself and to remain as neutral as possible while evaluating complex and often arcane technical issues. In addition to a biology/pre-med undergraduate degree and multiple non-matriculated graduate level course in biochemistry, cancer biology and radiological physics, I have a U.S. patent number 6,594,335 in "X-ray phase-contrast medical micro-imaging methods". ✔ Being from Detroit and having briefly worked in the largest factory in the world at the time, the Ford River Rouge Plant, I would like to serve on the Hazardous Materials Commission's environmental seat, because I have long been interested in technically documenting how industrial activities effect the public and the environment. I believe that most heavy industries can and should operate safely, so therefore, it is important to understand the industrial processes themselves, from the point-of-view of engineering and chemistry and how potential hazards can be understood, predicted, prevented, detected and mitigated. My interest in heavy industry was literally "ignited" when I was privileged to go on a special "hot tour" of the Rouge Plant when I was 9-years old and observed golden-orange molten metal ϭϬϮϱƐĐŽďĂƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϭƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ DĂƌƚŝŶĞǌ͕ϵϰϱϱϯ ůĞƌŬŽĨdŚĞŽĂƌĚΛĐŽď͘ĐĐĐŽƵŶƚǇ͘ƵƐKZ!#! 7* !"(##"(!"""'""!"#"$##"!&!!$"&'! $!# ###* 6* ##"#"!"$##'$!$##&-3.'"!#* 8*"#!"$#31Ϯϭ+Ϯϯϰ(!"&#!##+""!##! $!%"!"Ζ! '#&!#"");ϭͿDŽƚŚĞƌ͕ĨĂƚŚĞƌ͕ƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϮͿƌŽƚŚĞƌ͕ƐŝƐƚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚŵŽƚŚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚĨĂƚŚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚ ŐƌĂŶĚĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϯͿ,ƵƐďĂŶĚ͕ǁŝĨĞ͕ĨĂƚŚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ŵŽƚŚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ƐŽŶͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ƐƚĞƉƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚƐƚĞƉĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϰͿZĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚĚŽŵĞƐƚŝĐ ƉĂƌƚŶĞƌ͕ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ&ĂŵŝůǇŽĚĞƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϮϵϳ͖;ϱͿdŚĞƌĞůĂƚŝǀĞƐ͕ĂƐĚĞĨŝŶĞĚŝŶϭĂŶĚϮĂďŽǀĞ͕ĨŽƌĂƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚĚŽŵĞƐƚŝĐƉĂƌƚŶĞƌ͖;ϲͿŶǇ ƉĞƌƐŽŶǁŝƚŚǁŚŽŵĂŽĂƌĚDĞŵďĞƌƐŚĂƌĞƐĂĨŝŶĂŶĐŝĂůŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚĂƐĚĞĨŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚĞWŽůŝƚŝĐĂůZĞĨŽƌŵĐƚ;'ŽǀΖƚŽĚĞΑϴϳϭϬϯ͕&ŝŶĂŶĐŝĂů/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚͿ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐ ĂďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐƉĂƌƚŶĞƌŽƌďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞ͘ 2*"#'###"'$!%##"$$#""$###!$!"#-%!# /7361,7381.* 3* !"#"!! $!###%"!''#!!%'#!"#$#'* 4* !"!#!"("""(##"'! $!#)2. ####!"#!"&" !811(3.## ###"!$!""! $!'2345* 5* #"'%!$"#""#"'#""'$#!"!##* Important Information ϲϱϱͲϮϬϬϬ ###"###"'#"#!#!$(#(!!###"#' &(!#*&$!"###!##" #"$'""*$!"#!##""###"+!"""#!#' $"!#$!'!#"#"!%!(##(!""#!"#$#'* 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 Charles J. Davidson 01/03/2023 Please return completed applications to: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ϭϬϮϱƐĐŽďĂƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϭƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ Martinez, CA 94553 or email to: ClerkofTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us Contra Costa County ŽǇŽƵǁŽƌŬŝŶŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇ͍ Home Address - Street City WŽƐƚĂů Code PƌŝŵĂƌǇWhone (best number to reach you)EmailĚĚƌĞƐƐ Resident of Supervisorial District;ŝĨŽƵƚŽĨŽƵŶƚǇ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĞŶƚĞƌEͬͿ͗ /ĨzĞƐ͕ŝŶǁŚŝĐŚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚĚŽǇŽƵǁŽƌŬ͍ BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION &ŝƌƐƚEĂŵĞDŝĚĚůĞ/ŶŝƚŝĂů>ĂƐƚEĂŵĞ KĐĐƵƉĂƚŝŽŶĂů>ŝĐĞŶƐĞƐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͗ G.E.D. CertifiĐĂƚĞ Yes No EŽ ĞŐƌĞĞdǇƉĞͬCourse of Study/Major Degree AwardedColleges or Universities Attended High School Diploma CA High School Proficiency Certificate EDUCATION Yes Yes Yes EŽ ^ƚĂƚĞ ĞƌƚŝĨŝĐĂƚĞǁĂƌĚĞĚĨŽƌdƌĂŝŶŝŶŐ͍ YesEŽ Please check one: zĞƐEŽIf zĞs, how many? No ŚĞĐŬĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞďŽǆŝĨǇŽƵƉŽƐƐĞƐƐŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ͗ 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 ƵƌƌĞŶƚŵƉůŽǇĞƌ:ŽďdŝƚůĞ >ĞŶŐƚŚŽĨŵƉůŽǇŵĞŶƚ ,ŽǁůŽŶŐŚĂǀĞǇŽƵůŝǀĞĚŽƌǁŽƌŬĞĚŝŶŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇ͍ ŽĂƌĚ͕ŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͕ŽƌŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ Seat Name ,ĂǀĞǇŽƵĞǀĞƌĂƚƚĞŶĚĞĚĂŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵĂƌĞĂƉƉůǇŝŶŐ͍ KƚŚĞƌdƌĂŝŶŝŶŐƐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͗ YesEŽ ŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŽƌdŽŽů zĞƐNotŽƵůĚǇŽƵůŝŬĞƚŽďĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĨŽƌĂƉƉŽŝŶƚŵĞŶƚƚŽŽƚŚĞƌĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĚŝĞƐĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŵĂǇďĞƋƵĂůŝĨŝĞĚ͍ ƌĞǇŽƵĂǀĞƚĞƌĂŶŽĨƚŚĞh͘^͘ƌŵĞĚ&ŽƌĐĞƐ͍YĞƐNo ŽǇŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶǇŽďůŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŚĂƚŵŝŐŚƚĂĨĨĞĐƚǇŽƵƌĂƚƚĞŶĚĂŶĐĞĂƚƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐ͍ /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĞǆƉůĂŝŶ͗ zĞƐNo Nicholas Plurkowski Martinez 94553 5 Los Medanos College A.S. Process Technology CSU East Bay B.S. Mathematics Hazardous Materials Commission Labor Seat #2 - USW 5 (alternate) Print Form ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ J CA ✔ 40 years United Steelworkers - Local 5 Representative <1 year Operator 1A - Fire Engine Firefighter Endorsement CA DMV ✔ ✔ ✔ ĞƐĐƌŝďĞǇŽƵƌƋƵĂůŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌƚŚŝƐĂƉƉŽŝŶƚŵĞŶƚ͘;EKd͗ǇŽƵŵĂǇĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂĐŽƉǇŽĨǇŽƵƌƌĞƐƵŵĞͿ͘ WůĞĂƐĞĐŚĞĐŬŽŶĞ͗YesNo /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞůŝƐƚƚŚĞŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ;ƐͿŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵĂƌĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇƐĞƌǀŝŶŐ͗ Please check one:YesNo/f Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the county, such as grants, contracts, or ŽƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŝƉƐ͍ Do you have a familial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer toƚŚĞƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŝƉƐ ůŝƐƚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞΗ/ŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΗƐĞĐƚŝŽŶŽŶƉĂŐĞϯŽĨƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ or Resolution Eo. 20Ϯϭ/Ϯϯϰ)͘ >ŝƐƚĂŶǇǀŽůƵŶƚĞĞƌĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇĞǆƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶǇďŽĂƌĚƐŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƐĞƌǀĞĚ͘ /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĂůƐŽůŝƐƚƚŚĞŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ;ƐͿŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐůǇƐĞƌǀĞĚ͗ Please check one:YesNo /f Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: /ĂŵŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐŵǇƌĞƐƵŵĞǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͗ Please check one: zĞƐ EŽ ƌĞǇŽƵĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇŽƌŚĂǀĞǇŽƵĞǀĞƌďĞĞŶĂƉƉŽŝŶƚĞĚƚŽĂŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ͍ 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 WůĞĂƐĞĞǆƉůĂŝŶǁŚǇǇŽƵǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽƐĞƌǀĞŽŶƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌďŽĂƌĚ͕ĐŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͕ŽƌĐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘ Los Medanos College Process Technology Advisory Board Contra Costa County HazMat Oversight Committee regarding the Spent Catalyst Release from MRC on November 24-25, 2022 ✔ ✔ ✔ I have worked at the Shell/PBF Refinery in Martinez for over 10 years. My roles have consisted of Operator, United Steelworkers (USW) steward, USW Environmental Rep, USW Health & Safety Rep, Bargaining Committee Chair and a member of the Emergency Response Teams. I have responded to emergencies, such as the NuStar fire, and have dealt with Hazardous Materials and their mitigations first hand. I am currently a USW Local 5 Rep in Martinez and teach night classes for the Process Technology program at Los Medanos College in Pittsburg. ✔ I would like to serve on the Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission to further ensure that my community is protected from the dangers of hazardous materials and hazardous waste. I believe that the health, safety, and well-being of all Contra Costa residents is of the highest priorities and I believe that I may offer unique insight towards finding solutions to our current and future environmental issues. ϭϬϮϱƐĐŽďĂƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϭƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ DĂƌƚŝŶĞǌ͕ϵϰϱϱϯ Submit this application to:ůĞƌŬŽĨdŚĞŽĂƌĚΛĐŽď͘ĐĐĐŽƵŶƚǇ͘ƵƐKZClerk of the Board 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 7.As indicated in Board Resolution 20Ϯϭ/Ϯϯϰ, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of SupervisorsΖ member in any of the following relationships:;ϭͿDŽƚŚĞƌ͕ĨĂƚŚĞƌ͕ƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϮͿƌŽƚŚĞƌ͕ƐŝƐƚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚŵŽƚŚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚĨĂƚŚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚ ŐƌĂŶĚĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϯͿ,ƵƐďĂŶĚ͕ǁŝĨĞ͕ĨĂƚŚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ŵŽƚŚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ƐŽŶͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ƐƚĞƉƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚƐƚĞƉĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϰͿZĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚĚŽŵĞƐƚŝĐ ƉĂƌƚŶĞƌ͕ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ&ĂŵŝůǇŽĚĞƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϮϵϳ͖;ϱͿdŚĞƌĞůĂƚŝǀĞƐ͕ĂƐĚĞĨŝŶĞĚŝŶϭĂŶĚϮĂďŽǀĞ͕ĨŽƌĂƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚĚŽŵĞƐƚŝĐƉĂƌƚŶĞƌ͖;ϲͿŶǇ ƉĞƌƐŽŶǁŝƚŚǁŚŽŵĂŽĂƌĚDĞŵďĞƌƐŚĂƌĞƐĂĨŝŶĂŶĐŝĂůŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚĂƐĚĞĨŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚĞWŽůŝƚŝĐĂůZĞĨŽƌŵĐƚ;'ŽǀΖƚŽĚĞΑϴϳϭϬϯ͕&ŝŶĂŶĐŝĂů/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚͿ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐ ĂďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐƉĂƌƚŶĞƌŽƌďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞ͘ 1.This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: 1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and 2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. Important Information Questions about this application? Contact the Clerk of the Board at (925) ϲϱϱͲϮϬϬϬ or by email at ClerkofTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us Signed: Date: I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and understand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements and/or ommissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 Nicholas Plurkowski 1/24/24 Please return completed applications to: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ϭϬϮϱƐĐŽďĂƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϭƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ Martinez, CA 94553 or email to: ClerkofTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us Contra Costa County ŽǇŽƵǁŽƌŬŝŶŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇ͍ Home Address - Street City WŽƐƚĂů Code PƌŝŵĂƌǇWhone (best number to reach you)EmailĚĚƌĞƐƐ Resident of Supervisorial District;ŝĨŽƵƚŽĨŽƵŶƚǇ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĞŶƚĞƌEͬͿ͗ /ĨzĞƐ͕ŝŶǁŚŝĐŚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚĚŽǇŽƵǁŽƌŬ͍ BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION &ŝƌƐƚEĂŵĞDŝĚĚůĞ/ŶŝƚŝĂů>ĂƐƚEĂŵĞ KĐĐƵƉĂƚŝŽŶĂů>ŝĐĞŶƐĞƐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͗ G.E.D. CertifiĐĂƚĞ Yes No EŽ ĞŐƌĞĞdǇƉĞͬCourse of Study/Major Degree AwardedColleges or Universities Attended High School Diploma CA High School Proficiency Certificate EDUCATION Yes Yes Yes EŽ ^ƚĂƚĞ ĞƌƚŝĨŝĐĂƚĞǁĂƌĚĞĚĨŽƌdƌĂŝŶŝŶŐ͍ YesEŽ Please check one: zĞƐEŽIf zĞs, how many? No ŚĞĐŬĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞďŽǆŝĨǇŽƵƉŽƐƐĞƐƐŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ͗ 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 ƵƌƌĞŶƚŵƉůŽǇĞƌ:ŽďdŝƚůĞ >ĞŶŐƚŚŽĨŵƉůŽǇŵĞŶƚ ,ŽǁůŽŶŐŚĂǀĞǇŽƵůŝǀĞĚŽƌǁŽƌŬĞĚŝŶŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇ͍ ŽĂƌĚ͕ŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͕ŽƌŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ Seat Name ,ĂǀĞǇŽƵĞǀĞƌĂƚƚĞŶĚĞĚĂŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵĂƌĞĂƉƉůǇŝŶŐ͍ KƚŚĞƌdƌĂŝŶŝŶŐƐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ͗ YesEŽ ŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŽƌdŽŽů zĞƐNotŽƵůĚǇŽƵůŝŬĞƚŽďĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĨŽƌĂƉƉŽŝŶƚŵĞŶƚƚŽŽƚŚĞƌĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĚŝĞƐĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŵĂǇďĞƋƵĂůŝĨŝĞĚ͍ ƌĞǇŽƵĂǀĞƚĞƌĂŶŽĨƚŚĞh͘^͘ƌŵĞĚ&ŽƌĐĞƐ͍YĞƐNo ŽǇŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶǇŽďůŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŚĂƚŵŝŐŚƚĂĨĨĞĐƚǇŽƵƌĂƚƚĞŶĚĂŶĐĞĂƚƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐ͍ /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĞǆƉůĂŝŶ͗ zĞƐNo Timothy Bancroft Danville 94526 2 San Jose State Univeristy BS Chemical Engineering Chico State University BS Chemistry Modesto Junior College AS Physical Science Hazardous Materials Comission General Public Seat 50+ Print Form ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ A CA 17 yrs SSOE Inc Senior Associate 1 Month Professional Engineer (Chemical PE) Lic# CH-6225 ✔ ✔ ✔ ĞƐĐƌŝďĞǇŽƵƌƋƵĂůŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌƚŚŝƐĂƉƉŽŝŶƚŵĞŶƚ͘;EKd͗ǇŽƵŵĂǇĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂĐŽƉǇŽĨǇŽƵƌƌĞƐƵŵĞͿ͘ WůĞĂƐĞĐŚĞĐŬŽŶĞ͗YesNo /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞůŝƐƚƚŚĞŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ;ƐͿŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵĂƌĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇƐĞƌǀŝŶŐ͗ Please check one:YesNo/f Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the county, such as grants, contracts, or ŽƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŝƉƐ͍ Do you have a familial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer toƚŚĞƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŝƉƐ ůŝƐƚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞΗ/ŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶΗƐĞĐƚŝŽŶŽŶƉĂŐĞϯŽĨƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ or Resolution Eo. 20Ϯϭ/Ϯϯϰ)͘ >ŝƐƚĂŶǇǀŽůƵŶƚĞĞƌĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇĞǆƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶǇďŽĂƌĚƐŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƐĞƌǀĞĚ͘ /ĨzĞƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĂůƐŽůŝƐƚƚŚĞŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ;ƐͿŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐůǇƐĞƌǀĞĚ͗ Please check one:YesNo /f Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: /ĂŵŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐŵǇƌĞƐƵŵĞǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͗ Please check one: zĞƐ EŽ ƌĞǇŽƵĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇŽƌŚĂǀĞǇŽƵĞǀĞƌďĞĞŶĂƉƉŽŝŶƚĞĚƚŽĂŽŶƚƌĂŽƐƚĂŽƵŶƚǇĂĚǀŝƐŽƌǇďŽĂƌĚ͍ 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 WůĞĂƐĞĞǆƉůĂŝŶǁŚǇǇŽƵǁŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽƐĞƌǀĞŽŶƚŚŝƐƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌďŽĂƌĚ͕ĐŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ͕ŽƌĐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ͘ I currently server as the General Public Seat on the Hazardous Materials Commission. Hazardous Materials Commission ✔ ✔ ✔ I have over twenty years of Environmental, Hazardous Materials, and related Chemical Engineering experience including an extensive regulatory background focusing on hazardous materials handling, waste treatment, and code compliance in the Bio-pharmaceutical, Semiconductor and Renewal Energy industries. I have held the position of General Public Seat Since 2022 and before that I was the Alternate to the general public seat since cir 2008. ✔ I wish to serve my local community in the area of Hazardous Materials, Environmental Justice, and the protection of the public. ϭϬϮϱƐĐŽďĂƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ϭƐƚ&ůŽŽƌ DĂƌƚŝŶĞǌ͕ϵϰϱϱϯ Submit this application to:ůĞƌŬŽĨdŚĞŽĂƌĚΛĐŽď͘ĐĐĐŽƵŶƚǇ͘ƵƐKZClerk of the Board 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 7.As indicated in Board Resolution 20Ϯϭ/Ϯϯϰ, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of SupervisorsΖ member in any of the following relationships:;ϭͿDŽƚŚĞƌ͕ĨĂƚŚĞƌ͕ƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϮͿƌŽƚŚĞƌ͕ƐŝƐƚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚŵŽƚŚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚĨĂƚŚĞƌ͕ŐƌĂŶĚƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚ ŐƌĂŶĚĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϯͿ,ƵƐďĂŶĚ͕ǁŝĨĞ͕ĨĂƚŚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ŵŽƚŚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ƐŽŶͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌͲŝŶͲůĂǁ͕ƐƚĞƉƐŽŶ͕ĂŶĚƐƚĞƉĚĂƵŐŚƚĞƌ͖;ϰͿZĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚĚŽŵĞƐƚŝĐ ƉĂƌƚŶĞƌ͕ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ&ĂŵŝůǇŽĚĞƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϮϵϳ͖;ϱͿdŚĞƌĞůĂƚŝǀĞƐ͕ĂƐĚĞĨŝŶĞĚŝŶϭĂŶĚϮĂďŽǀĞ͕ĨŽƌĂƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚĚŽŵĞƐƚŝĐƉĂƌƚŶĞƌ͖;ϲͿŶǇ ƉĞƌƐŽŶǁŝƚŚǁŚŽŵĂŽĂƌĚDĞŵďĞƌƐŚĂƌĞƐĂĨŝŶĂŶĐŝĂůŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚĂƐĚĞĨŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚĞWŽůŝƚŝĐĂůZĞĨŽƌŵĐƚ;'ŽǀΖƚŽĚĞΑϴϳϭϬϯ͕&ŝŶĂŶĐŝĂů/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚͿ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐ ĂďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐƉĂƌƚŶĞƌŽƌďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞ͘ 1.This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: 1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and 2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. Important Information Questions about this application? Contact the Clerk of the Board at (925) ϲϱϱͲϮϬϬϬ or by email at ClerkofTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us Signed: Date: I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and understand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements and/or ommissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. 3$*(RI 7+,6)250,6$38%/,&'2&80(17 Timothy Bancroft 10/31/2023 Please return completed applications to: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 1025 Escobar Street, 1st Floor Martinez, CA 94553 or email to: ClerkofTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us Contra Costa County Do you work in Contra Costa County? Home Address - Street City Postal Code Primary Phone (best number to reach you)Email Address Resident of Supervisorial District (if out of County, please enter N/A): If Yes, in which District do you work? BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION First Name Middle Initial Last Name Occupational Licenses Completed: G.E.D. Certificate Yes No No Degree Type/Course of Study/Major Degree AwardedColleges or Universities Attended High School Diploma CA High School Proficiency Certificate EDUCATIO N Yes Yes Yes No State Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Pl ease check one: Yes No If Yes, how many? No Check appropriate box if you possess one of the following: PAGE 1 of 3 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT Current Employer Job Title Length of Employment How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? Board, Committee, or Commission Seat Name Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Other Trainings Completed: Yes No District Locator Tool Yes NoWould you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? If Yes, please explain: Yes No James Payne Martinez 94553 5 DVC General Hazardous Materials Commission Labor Seat #2 - United Steelworkers Current Member Print Form 4 4 4 A CA 60 years United Steelworkers Local 5 Secretary-Treasurer 40 years 4 4 Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume). Please check one: Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: Please check one: Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the county, such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Do you have a familial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section on page 3 of this application or Resolution No. 2021/234). List any volunteer and community experience, including any boards on which you have served. If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: Please check one: Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: I am including my resume with this application: Please check one: Yes No Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? PAGE 2 of 3 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, committee, or commission. Hazardous Materials Commission 4 4 4 SEE ABOVE 4 Current member representing Labor on Commission for the past 30+ years. 1025 Escobar Street, 1st Floor Martinez, CA 94553 Submit this application to: ClerkofTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us OR Clerk of the Board 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 7.As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. 1.This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: 1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and 2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. Important Information Questions about this application? Contact the Clerk of the Board at (925) 655-2000 or by email at ClerkofTheBoard@cob.cccounty.us Signed: Date: I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and understand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements and/or ommissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. PAGE 3 of 3 THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT 1/26/2024 Submit Date: Jul 27, 2023 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 4 Length of Employment 7.5 yrs Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? District 5 How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 7.5 yrs Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Hazardous Materials Commission: Submitted Theresa M Johnson Concord CA 94521 McCampbell Analytical Director, QAQC & Safety Theresa M Johnson Seat Name Environmental Organization Alternate seat or General Public Alternate seat Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? NA Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended CSU, Bakersfield Degree Type / Course of Study / Major BS, Environmental Resource Management Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Moorpark College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Associates of Science in Environmental Sciences Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Theresa M Johnson Upload a Resume Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A HAZWOPER 40 hour + 8hr refresher annually Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Hazardous Material FRA Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: CPR/First Aid/AED, Concord CERT Instructor and member, Volunteer in Concord PD VIPS program. Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. I would like to have an alternate seat on the hazardous materials commission because I am heavily involved in emergency management in my laboratory as well and a volunteer in my community and it would possibly allow me to directly contribute to my community in specifics related to hazardous materials that affect or are facing Contra Costa County with additional policies or procedures. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) I am full time Regulatory Compliance Director for local environmental testing laboratory where I oversee all regulatory aspects including safety and hazardous materials and manage hazardous waste to maintain compliance within local, state and federal laws. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Theresa M Johnson Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: NA If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: NA List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. I spend my off time outside the lab as a volunteer for the last 7 years with Concord CERT, and in 2020 became an Instructor. I've been fortunate to teach a full FEMA 20hour+ Basic CERT course to Teens in MDHS in Jan 2023 and am finishing teaching an Adult Basic CERT summer class at Concord PD with other Instructors. As well as CERT I am a Volunteer in Police (VIPS) services to Concord PD and participate at community events and assist in PD as needed. Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: NA Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: NA Theresa M Johnson Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Theresa M Johnson Theresa M Johnson Concord, CA Johnson, Theresa Page 1 of 2 Highlight of Accomplishments o TNI 2016 Speaker for CWEA Bay Section– Topic Management review process and document control processes to comply with TNI 2016. (May 2022) o Expanded testing capabilities at MAI since 2016 with accreditations to new standards and methods under CA ELAP, ORELAP, ISO 17025:2017, DOD in PFAS for Drinking water, Aqueous and Solids matrices, and Industrial Hygiene test offerings. o Implemented growth in Chemistry with the retention of associates and cross training within the department for expanded test offerings at both FGL and NAMSA. o Worked with the engineers in the design and build in the expansion of the Chemistry Dept at NAMSA, FGL, & MAI. o Regulatory knowledge / experience with: EPA regulations for CA environmental testing labs, 40CFR141, 40CFR136, CA ELAP (CA regs w TNI 2016 minus 2), ORELAP (TNI 2016), AIHA (ISO17025:2017), USDA Foreign Soil permit, CLIA licensing under Joint Commission, OSHA compliance for health & safety standards, 40Hr HAZWOPER certified, FDA (21CFR Part 11, 58, 210, 820, 1300 and others), cGMP, GLP, GCP and ISO (13485, 9001). EXPERIENCE McCampbell Analytical, Inc. Pittsburg, CA Director, QAQC & Safety Feb 2016- Present  Run the day-to-day operations within all aspects the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Program to comply with regulatory guidelines (DOD QSM, ISO, EPA, Standard Methods, NELAP, & ELAP under TNI 2016). o Completed continuing certification however MAI is fully compliant in TNI 2016 from audits with ORELAP 3/2022 and CA ELAP using a third-party assessment vendor 10/2022. o Brought DOD PFAS testing into the laboratory after extensive validations, PT success and inspections to receive certification for Drinking water (E537.1) and following the DOD QSM for Aqueous and Solid matrices in 2020 with continued accreditation to date. o Achieved Lab Approval for testing under UCMR 5 (starts Jan 2023) and successfully participated and were validated under UCMR 4. o Successfully opened and obtained a CLIA license and certification for SARS-CV2 testing in May 2020 and have continued audit inspections through the Joint Commission standards and the CDPH for licensing and testing compliance.  Developed, implemented, and maintain a high functioning quality management system. Host all external regulatory, client audits / tours with new/ continued certification. This includes open/closing meetings, initiating and responding to all inspection findings for the entire laboratory.  Responsible for and maintain corrective action/ non conformances, SOPs, complaints, MDL/ validation studies, support equipment verification and calibration, instrument inventory control, control chart review, QA manual review, Proficiency testing program, Internal Audits, for all methods accredited and assist IT with specific testing criteria and functionality to ensure QC is met appropriately.  Oversee Inorganics Department as a Technical Advisor/subject matter expert for process testing improvement or client sample troubleshooting (ie BOD testing anomalies, sample matrix issues).  Responsible for the EH&S Program maintaining safety as a priority for all staff and under waste permit per Contra Costa Haz Materials program, hazardous waste disposal, audit inspections /responses, waste characterization/profiles, trainings provided to the lab related to safety (general safety, respirator fit test, CPR/AED First Aid, Forklift).  Responsible for hiring/firing, and work with HR to create a safe and healthy work environment for all staff.  Implement and create more efficient workflows within the organization within all aspects of the laboratory.  Provide annual training to employees to meet regulatory requirements or as needed (ie Data Integrity & Ethics Training accompanied by Computer Safety Awareness and Sexual Harassment training). BioScreen Testing Services (now ALS) Torrance, CA Clinical Manager Oct 2015 – Jan 2016  Responsible for the day-to-day Clinical Operations in the Los Angeles facility, including but not limited to: Theresa M Johnson Concord, CA Johnson, Theresa Page 2 of 2 o Personnel management, budgeting, train/supervise research assistants/clinical coordinators. Perform annual GCP training to all Clinical staff at this location. Plan, develop, the safety and efficacy of research studies under the supervision of the Principal Investigator. BioScreen Testing Services (now ALS) Torrance, CA Quality Assurance Manager Sep 2010 - Sep 2015  Responsible for the day-to-day operations within the QA Dept and Receiving Dept to comply with all applicable FDA guidelines, ISO9001, cGMP, GLP, GDP and GCP practices and ensure that all employees are trained. North American Science Associates Inc., NAMSA Northwood, Ohio Chemistry Dept Supervisor Dec 2007 – Sep 2010  Maintained compliance with 21CFR Part 11, cGMP and GLP practices. ISO 13485 and ISO 17025 accreditation.  Responsible for coordination of workload/projects, work schedules, hiring, budgeting for the dept, inventory control & establish goals within the department. Expanded Chemistry lab in Aug. 2009 to increase space and efficiency FGL Environmental and Agriculture Santa Paula, CA Inorganic Department Supervisor Aug 2001- Nov 2007  Responsible for coordinating department testing, revising SOPs per NELAP requirements, & project management. Participated in all audits, renewal of laboratory certification per ELAP, Dept of Energy and Client audits/tours.  Performed Inorganic analysis using Standard Methods and EPA methods using Flow Injection Analysis for various analytes, wet chemistry techniques, and Ion Chromatography (IC) for various methods. Aquaria Group, Marineland Aquarium Products Moorpark, CA Laboratory technician Sep 1995 – Aug 2001  Documented fish species and mortality rate, performed various wet chemistry techniques/prepared. Education  Bachelor of Science, Environmental Resource Management, California State University, Bakersfield  Assoicate of Science, Environmental Sciences, Moorpark College Computer Knowledge LIMS database(s) Microsoft Office (Outlook, Teams, PowerPoint, excel, word, etc) Trackwise Program Crystal Report Program Corel Cad 2016 Electronic Document System (Master Control & Qualtrax) Adobe Acrobat Pro/DC and Foxit Phantom Continuing Education Courses  Security Awareness of Hazardous Materials Training course, 2005  Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation course, Cont. Education credit University of Sacramento, California, 2004  FEMA course, Introduction to Hazardous Materials (CEU), 2016 Certification  Certified Lean Six Sigma Green Belt, 2016  ISO 9001:2008 Lead Auditor Certified  First Aid/AED and Adult/Infant CPR certified, since 2000-current  40 HAZWOPER certified 2016-current (8hr refresher annually)  Hazardous Materials First Responder Awareness Certificate (2023) Volunteer Services / Affiliations  Disaster preparedness Instructor - Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) -Concord (2016-present) o January 2023 – 20+ hours Instructed Teens in Mt.Diablo High School on Basic CERT course o July 2023 – 20+hours Instructed Adult Basic CERT course  Concord Police Dept Volunteer Program (VIPS) since 2019  Standard Methods Committee member for Joint Task Force (2019-current)  American Chemical Society member 2016- present  TNI Credentials Committee – Full voting member 2023 Submit Date: Jan 03, 2024 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 5 Length of Employment 3 months Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 7 years Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Hazardous Materials Commission: Submitted Lisa A Martell Crockett CA 94525 Planned Parenthood of Northern California Technical Supervisor, Clinical Laboratory Lisa A Martell Seat Name HMC Environmental Org Seat Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended West Chester University of PA Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Biology Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded? Yes No Lisa A Martell Upload a Resume Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A Clinical Laboratory Scientist Internship Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: CA-CLS generalist license, ASCP MT Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. I have been involved in community organizing in a local way with regards to Selby Slag along with keeping up on the developments ongoing at the P66 refinery in Rodeo. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) I am qualified because of my clinical laboratory background. I have an understanding on how hazardous materials affect human health and how to measure its effects. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: Lisa A Martell Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. Community Activist Group working and in direct communication with Asha Setty at DTSC regarding the project at Selby Slag. Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information Lisa A Martell 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Lisa A Martell Lisa Argento Martell Crockett, CA 94525 Education Master of Science-Biology January 1999-June 2000 Credits earned toward an MS West Chester University West Chester, PA Bachelor of Science-Biology/Medical Technology May 1997 West Chester University West Chester, PA Internship Medical Technology Internship Pennsylvania Hospital Philadelphia, PA ●Clinical rotations including clinical coursework in Microbiology, Serology, Chemistry, Blood Bank, and Hematology. Work Experience Clinical Laboratory Scientist-Technical Supervisor August 2023-Present Planned Parenthood of Northern California ●Oversee the regional laboratory operations ●Supervise testing personnel and laboratory assistants ●Perform and prepare QA reports, initial and annual validations ●Assure quality results in a timely fashion by reviewing data ●Perform testing utilizing the Panther system as needed ●Maintain documentation, protocols and policies ●Interface with clinics to address result issues ●Interface with other department managers to assure clinic testing needs are met Clinical Laboratory Scientist-Technical Specialist January 2023-October 2023 University of California San Francisco ●Perform the metagenomic Next Generation Sequencing using the illumina platform in the microbiology clinical laboratory to identify elusive pathogens in patient’s CSF with symptoms of encephalitis or meningitis ●Technical Specialist overseeing the metagenomics NGS assay performance ●Troubleshooting issues with the mNGS CSF test results ●Development and validation of new technology/matrices for mNGS testing ●Assist in writing of SOPs, perform validation on new instruments, maintain instrumentation Clinical Laboratory Scientist-Technical Specialist June 2017-January 2023 University of California Berkeley ●Assist in writing of SOPs, perform validation on new instruments, maintain all instrumentation, ●Primary liaison between LIS for coordination of upgrades, interface installation and troubleshooting, update test menu and interface with EMR ●Primary trainer for all lab equipment including but not limited to the LIS ●Maintain proficiency testing programs ●Provide technical assessments for needs of new equipment, set-up and interfacing of new equipment, ●Perform validation and set up and execute QCP program. ●Performing routine and stat testing in a clinical laboratory including but not limited to chemistry, coagulation, hematology, microscopy, microbiology and ●Report results to clinicians including critical values within established turnaround times.021 ●Perform scheduled quality controls on all assays ●Participate in proficiency and competency testing ●Troubleshooting assay issues ●Maintain point of care instrumentation Instruments used: Pentra 400C, Pentra 60+, Clinitek, Cepheid, Quidel (D-dimer), Qualigen(quantitative bHCG) Examiner I December 2016-June 2017 California Department of Public Health-Laboratory Field Services ●Reviewing of licensing applications for both clinical laboratory facilities and personnel ●Assuring all renewal and initial applicants meet both the California and CLIA regulations ●Position was taken with the anticipation of promotion to Examiner II ●Expertise and knowledge also utilized for assisting in re-writing of the state regulations to assure clarity and quality to keep pace with new technologies, namely molecular techniques, including next generation sequencing Lead Clinical Laboratory Scientist, Generalist September 2015-December 2016 Southern Humboldt County Regional Health District ●Performing routine and stat testing in a clinical laboratory including but not limited to chemistry, coagulation, hematology, microscopy, microbiology and transfusion services ●Report results to clinicians including critical values within established turnaround times. ●Perform scheduled quality controls on all assays ●Participate in proficiency and competency testing ●Troubleshooting assay issues ●Maintain point of care instrumentation Instruments used: Siemens EXL200, Sysmex600Ca, Sysmex1000i, MedTox, ABL800 Co-ox, Centriq LIMS Clinical Laboratory Scientist, Sr. Supervisor, Specialist May 2011-July 2015 University of California San Francisco ●Performing routine testing in a molecular diagnostics laboratory ●Both validated and performed DNA extraction, quantitation and subsequent PCR based assays, Sanger sequencing and fragment analysis ●Maintenance and updating of documentation throughout the lab to CLIA standards (Federal amendment regulating clinical laboratory testing), ●Maintenance of laboratory licensing, monitoring testing requests and providing assay schedule to assure best turn around time for results. ●Equipment validation and maintenance record review, maintaining quality systems and performance and planning of assay development and validation to support solid tumor molecular testing. ●Utilized Copath to order histological recuts, accession samples and provide preliminary reports to pathologists. Utilized APeX EMR system to track resulting. ●Instruments used: Roche LC480 Light Cycler, Life Technologies 3500xL. Clinical Laboratory Sr. Scientist January 2005-April 2011 BioMarin Pharmaceutical, Inc. ●Immunogenicity, pharmacokinetic and biomarker assay development and validation to support clinical trials in a GLP/GCP environment. ●Writing of development reports along with validation protocols and reports documenting bioanalytical efforts in support of IND filing. ●Management of outsourced assay development, validation and testing of clinical samples. ●Development and performing ELISA and ECLA assays for monitoring anti-drug antibodies and pharmacokinetic studies. ●Polyclonal antibody purification utilizing AKTA FPLC. ●Maintained CLIA license for lab, proficiency testing. ●Supervise a staff of research associates and direct development of new assays while troubleshooting validated assays. ●Instruments used: Spectramax plate reader, MesoScale Discovery electrochemiluminescence plate reader, AKTA FPLC Staff Research Associate II/Laboratory Manager June 2003-July 2004 University of California San Francisco’s Cancer Center San Francisco, CA ●DNA extraction/isolation from paraffin embedded samples for comparative genomic hybridization (CGH). ●CGH performed on both cell culture and paraffin embedded tumor extracted DNA. ●Microdissection of tumor tissue from paraffin embedded slides. ●Growth and maintenance of several cervical cancer cell lines, RT-PCR, Taqman, RNA extraction from cell lines. ●Managed the laboratory for primary investigator. Maintained equipment, orders and inventory of supplies including supervision of staff. ●Data analysis and reports presented to PI weekly. ●Use of excel, word, Genepix, Spot/Sproc for CGH analysis. Research Biologist September 2000-May 2003 Viropharma, Inc. Exton, PA ●High throughput screening in cell culture for antivirals within a small organic molecule library. ●Manage screening data, maintain compound library, ●Perform follow-up work (IC50, time of drug addition studies, drug mechanism elucidation work including production of drug resistant strains and characterizing resistance through cloning and sequencing). ●Instruments used: Biomek FX, Biomek 2000 Graduate Assistant January 1999-May 2000 West Chester University West Chester, PA ●Teaching non-majors Biology laboratory courses. Microtechniques Technician September 1997-January 1999 Hexagon Press West Chester University West Chester, PA ●Staining and digitizing microscope slides for textbook publication. Personal Assistant May 1995-September 1997 West Chester, PA ●Aided a quadriplegic individual in his home with range of motion exercises and personal hygiene. Accreditation American Society of Clinical Pathologists (ASCP) certification for Medical Technologist. #03854769 California State Clinical Laboratory Science License License# MTA40604 Volunteer Experience Chairperson of Tenant’s Voice Council of Marin County Board member with Grassroots Leadership Network of Marin Participant in the Chester County AIDS Social Services Buddy Program. Publications and Patents White, J. T., Martell, L. A., Prince, W. S., Boyer, R., Crockett, L., Cox, C., VanTuyl, A., Aguillera, A., Foehr, E. Comparison of Neutralizing Antibody Assays for Receptor Binding and Enzyme Activity of the Enzyme Replacement Therapeutic Naglazyme (Galsufase). AAPS Journal. 2008. White, J. T., Martell, L. A., VanTuyl, A., Boyer, R., Warness, L., Taniguchi, G.T., Foehr, E. Development, Validation and Clinical Implementation of an Assay to Measure Total Antibody Response to Naglazyme (Galsufase). AAPS Journal, 2008. Patent US20080003626A1 Assays for Detection of Antibodies to Lysosomal Enzymes. Published Jan. 3, 2008. Submit Date: Nov 09, 2023 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 3 Length of Employment 1 Year Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 3 Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Hazardous Materials Commission: Submitted Rohan Tyagi Brentwood CA 94513 The Rose Foundation Water Justice Fellow Rohan Tyagi Seat Name Environmental Organization Alternate Seat Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? 5 Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended DIablo Valley College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major A.A. in Anthropology (Concurrent Enrollment) Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Los Medanos College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Philosophy (Concurrent Enrollment) Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Rohan Tyagi Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. Having successfully completed the HMC student intern program last year, I've developed a keen interest in continuing to address hazardous materials issues and their implications within our county. With a longstanding involvement in environmental initiatives since my youth, I believe my perspective uniquely positions me to advocate for the recognition of youth voices in Contra Costa. Building on my year as an intern, I aspire to serve as a representative for the groups I work with, contributing to the advancement of environmental and hazardous materials issues in our county. Rohan Tyagi Upload a Resume Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) Currently, I serve as a Water Justice Fellow at the Rose Foundation in Oakland. In this role, I'm dedicated to developing a toolkit at Lake Merritt for water testing, ensuring that future generations are well-prepared to assess the implications of hazardous materials issues in the estuary. Additionally, I bring experience as a speaker on panels at the Contra Costa Watershed Symposium, and I am slated to speak at the San Francisco State of the Estuary Conference. My focus in these discussions revolves around environmental justice issues related to water and addressing decades of environmental degradation. In my role as Vice- Chair of the City of Brentwood Youth Commission, I've familiarized myself with procedural roles. I actively organize events such as our city's Multicultural Fair and serve as a liaison to our Parks and Recreation Department. As the Vice-Chair of Sustainable Leaders in Action, the youth branch of Sustainable Contra Costa, I have successfully organized and advocated for moratoriums and bans on oil and gas drilling in Brentwood and Antioch. In this role, I also coordinate environmentally educational resources for youth through our newsletter, climate career chats, and policy efforts, with the overarching goal of crafting a sustainable community for future generations. My background extends to being a student researcher at UC Davis, where I contributed to the aquaponic and aquaculture field, exploring sustainable alternatives to modern agriculture. Notably, as a former student intern with the Hazardous Materials Commission, I took on the task of drafting and delivering a presentation to the commission on equity analysis and emergency planning concerning the placement of pipelines in our county. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: Rohan Tyagi List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. National Honors Society; I organize trash pickups, clothing drives, and food donation drives Sustainable Leaders in Action; participating and organizing sustainable service events for youth Serving on the City of Brentwood Youth Commission Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information Rohan Tyagi 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Rohan Tyagi ROHAN TYAGI Brentwood, CA| EDUCATION HERITAGE HIGH SCHOOL Brentwood, CA 4.25 GPA, 10 AP Classes, Ranked 1/633 of class of 2025 July 2021 - June 2025 Appointed to School Advisory Council as one of two student representatives LOS MEDANOS COLLEGE Pittsburg, CA 4.0 GPA, Courses Taken: PHIL-100, PHIL-122, PHIL-133 Jan 2022 - May 2022 9 Credits DIABLO VALLEY COLLEGE Pleasant Hill, CA 4.0 GPA, Courses Taken: ANTHR-130, ANTHR-140, BUS-109, BUSAC-186, COMSC-140, May 2022 - Present PH-135, PH-137, OCEAN-101, SOCSC-111 29 Credits EXPERIENCE SUSTAINABLE LEADERS IN ACTION Contra Costa County, CA Vice-Chair March 2022 – Present ●Manage outreach material and promotions for Sustainable Leaders In Action (SLIA) through social media and digital outreach; Aided in events such as Climate Careers Chat, Newsletter, and the Action of the Month to promote a greener Contra Costa; Advocate for policy change, culminating in bans in Antioch and Brentwood on new oil and gas drilling THE ROSE FOUNDATION Oakland, CA Water Justice Fellow May 2022 – Present ●Building water justice toolkit for youth at Lake Merritt; Engaging and formulating multiple climate justice initiatives such as holding seminars and surveying demographics of communities affected by pollution; Working with the Lake Merritt Rotary Nature Center to monitor organisms after the Akashiwo Algal Bloom and volunteered in lakeside expositions HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION Contra Costa County, CA Student Intern Oct 2022 – April 2023 ●Engaged with policy work and new propositions for county’s regulations; Researched pipeline safety and emergency planning for youth in our county and proposed expanding required emergency plans for schools within a thousand feet of a pipeline and equity analysis for schools and communities located near pipelines YOUTH COMMISSION Brentwood, CA Vice-Chair April 2022 – Present ●Serving a two year term as Vice-chair and Youth Commissioner for the city of Brentwood; Planned and continuing to create major events in our city, such as our city’s Multicultural Fair and Craft Fair; Led fundraisers for the city, supporting the creation of a scholarship for our city’s youth residents: Working as liaison to the department of Parks and Recreation as well as formerly the Downtown Business Coalition PUBLIC HEALTH TOBACCO YOUTH COALITION East Contra Costa County,CA Committee Member March 2023 –Present ●Intern with the Contra Costa health department;Developing material to educate youth about the dangers of tobacco use and prevention;Campaigning to pass legislation prohibiting flavored tobacco sales and more restrictive measures on tobacco use AQUACULTURE AND AQUAPONICS AT UC DAVIS Davis,CA Student Researcher July 2023 –August 2023 ●Worked as a part of the California summer school for science &mathematics (COSMOS);Researched and traveled to various sites across Yolo county to understand sustainable agriculture methods;Wrote and presented a final research paper and presentation on the possible implementation of sustainable coral aquaculture alongside the Californian coast STANFORD PROGRAM ON INTERNATIONAL &CROSS CULTURAL EDU.Palo Alto,CA China Scholars Program August 2023 –Present ●Course sponsored by Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI);Selected as one of 20 high school sophomores,juniors,and seniors chosen from throughout the United States to engage in an intensive study of China;Writing research paper on the implications of China’s environmental mandate and a lack of US-China cooperative environmental efforts NATIONAL SECURITY LANGUAGE INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH,MANDARIN Remote Virtual Scholar August 2023 –Present ●Received a scholarship from the US Department of State to study Mandarin virtually over the course of a semester; Studying critically needed language as part of a cohort of 30 students from across the nation;Engaging with global affairs and cultural exchange with guest speakers and fellow students LEADERSHIP SCIENCE OLYMPIAD President &Founder ●Created first Science Olympiad team in my district;Mentored students in Biological and Earth sciences;Fundraised and received grants for equitable practices and the diversity of our team amounting to over $1000 PROJECT CLIMATE Vice-President (23-24)&Treasurer (22-23) ●Implemented bi-monthly campus cleanups removing about 20 bags of trash quarterly;Planted new greenery on campus through a community garden;Raised over $900 dollars through fundraisers and a community grant SPEECH AND DEBATE Secretar y (23-24)&Treasurer (22-23) ●Established the Speech team with over 25 current competitors;Raised over $1000 dollars through fundraising initiatives;Won awards including 1st at Lions Club Student Speaker Contest (x2),3 time finalist (2nd,4th,6th)at Jon Schamber Invitational,Finalist at GGSA Tournaments,and 2nd place in Poetry Slam and Orator y at El Cerrito Invitational NATIONAL HONORS SOCIETY Treasurer (23-24) ●Led the implementation of multiple ser vice events including a sustainable clothing swap,food drive for a local church, and a clothing drive for victims of California’s flooding HEALTH OCCUPATIONS STUDENTS OF AMERICA (HOSA) Club Representative (22-23) ●Organized a school-wide blood drive in collaboration with our local Red Cross;Facilitated volunteering opportunities to make and distribute sanitary kits for people experiencing homelessness;Placed top 10 within California state HOSA for Cultural Diversity and Disparities in Healthcare as well as Public Speaking ORCHESTRA Musician’s Council (22-23) ●Proficient in playing the Cello for 6 years,first chair of the Cello section;Actively contributed to the Musician’s Council in organizing concerts,field trips,and senior awards;Collaborated to implement a scholarship program for four graduating seniors in the band program ADDITIONAL Technical Skills:Advanced in Python &Java;Experienced in Salesforce,Microsoft Office,&Meta Business Suite Languages:Fluent in English and Hindi;Full professional in Spanish &Chinese (Mandarin) Submit Date: Nov 09, 2023 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 3 Length of Employment 1 Year Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 3 Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Hazardous Materials Commission: Submitted Rohan Tyagi Brentwood CA 94513 The Rose Foundation Water Justice Fellow Rohan Tyagi Seat Name Environmental Organization Alternate Seat Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? 5 Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * High School Diploma College/ University A Name of College Attended DIablo Valley College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major A.A. in Anthropology (Concurrent Enrollment) Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Los Medanos College Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Philosophy (Concurrent Enrollment) Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Rohan Tyagi Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Other Training A Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. Having successfully completed the HMC student intern program last year, I've developed a keen interest in continuing to address hazardous materials issues and their implications within our county. With a longstanding involvement in environmental initiatives since my youth, I believe my perspective uniquely positions me to advocate for the recognition of youth voices in Contra Costa. Building on my year as an intern, I aspire to serve as a representative for the groups I work with, contributing to the advancement of environmental and hazardous materials issues in our county. Rohan Tyagi Upload a Resume Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) Currently, I serve as a Water Justice Fellow at the Rose Foundation in Oakland. In this role, I'm dedicated to developing a toolkit at Lake Merritt for water testing, ensuring that future generations are well-prepared to assess the implications of hazardous materials issues in the estuary. Additionally, I bring experience as a speaker on panels at the Contra Costa Watershed Symposium, and I am slated to speak at the San Francisco State of the Estuary Conference. My focus in these discussions revolves around environmental justice issues related to water and addressing decades of environmental degradation. In my role as Vice- Chair of the City of Brentwood Youth Commission, I've familiarized myself with procedural roles. I actively organize events such as our city's Multicultural Fair and serve as a liaison to our Parks and Recreation Department. As the Vice-Chair of Sustainable Leaders in Action, the youth branch of Sustainable Contra Costa, I have successfully organized and advocated for moratoriums and bans on oil and gas drilling in Brentwood and Antioch. In this role, I also coordinate environmentally educational resources for youth through our newsletter, climate career chats, and policy efforts, with the overarching goal of crafting a sustainable community for future generations. My background extends to being a student researcher at UC Davis, where I contributed to the aquaponic and aquaculture field, exploring sustainable alternatives to modern agriculture. Notably, as a former student intern with the Hazardous Materials Commission, I took on the task of drafting and delivering a presentation to the commission on equity analysis and emergency planning concerning the placement of pipelines in our county. Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No If Yes, please explain: Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: Rohan Tyagi List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. National Honors Society; I organize trash pickups, clothing drives, and food donation drives Sustainable Leaders in Action; participating and organizing sustainable service events for youth Serving on the City of Brentwood Youth Commission Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information Rohan Tyagi 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Rohan Tyagi ROHAN TYAGI Brentwood, CA| EDUCATION HERITAGE HIGH SCHOOL Brentwood, CA 4.25 GPA, 10 AP Classes, Ranked 1/633 of class of 2025 July 2021 - June 2025 Appointed to School Advisory Council as one of two student representatives LOS MEDANOS COLLEGE Pittsburg, CA 4.0 GPA, Courses Taken: PHIL-100, PHIL-122, PHIL-133 Jan 2022 - May 2022 9 Credits DIABLO VALLEY COLLEGE Pleasant Hill, CA 4.0 GPA, Courses Taken: ANTHR-130, ANTHR-140, BUS-109, BUSAC-186, COMSC-140, May 2022 - Present PH-135, PH-137, OCEAN-101, SOCSC-111 29 Credits EXPERIENCE SUSTAINABLE LEADERS IN ACTION Contra Costa County, CA Vice-Chair March 2022 – Present ●Manage outreach material and promotions for Sustainable Leaders In Action (SLIA) through social media and digital outreach; Aided in events such as Climate Careers Chat, Newsletter, and the Action of the Month to promote a greener Contra Costa; Advocate for policy change, culminating in bans in Antioch and Brentwood on new oil and gas drilling THE ROSE FOUNDATION Oakland, CA Water Justice Fellow May 2022 – Present ●Building water justice toolkit for youth at Lake Merritt; Engaging and formulating multiple climate justice initiatives such as holding seminars and surveying demographics of communities affected by pollution; Working with the Lake Merritt Rotary Nature Center to monitor organisms after the Akashiwo Algal Bloom and volunteered in lakeside expositions HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION Contra Costa County, CA Student Intern Oct 2022 – April 2023 ●Engaged with policy work and new propositions for county’s regulations; Researched pipeline safety and emergency planning for youth in our county and proposed expanding required emergency plans for schools within a thousand feet of a pipeline and equity analysis for schools and communities located near pipelines YOUTH COMMISSION Brentwood, CA Vice-Chair April 2022 – Present ●Serving a two year term as Vice-chair and Youth Commissioner for the city of Brentwood; Planned and continuing to create major events in our city, such as our city’s Multicultural Fair and Craft Fair; Led fundraisers for the city, supporting the creation of a scholarship for our city’s youth residents: Working as liaison to the department of Parks and Recreation as well as formerly the Downtown Business Coalition PUBLIC HEALTH TOBACCO YOUTH COALITION East Contra Costa County,CA Committee Member March 2023 –Present ●Intern with the Contra Costa health department;Developing material to educate youth about the dangers of tobacco use and prevention;Campaigning to pass legislation prohibiting flavored tobacco sales and more restrictive measures on tobacco use AQUACULTURE AND AQUAPONICS AT UC DAVIS Davis,CA Student Researcher July 2023 –August 2023 ●Worked as a part of the California summer school for science &mathematics (COSMOS);Researched and traveled to various sites across Yolo county to understand sustainable agriculture methods;Wrote and presented a final research paper and presentation on the possible implementation of sustainable coral aquaculture alongside the Californian coast STANFORD PROGRAM ON INTERNATIONAL &CROSS CULTURAL EDU.Palo Alto,CA China Scholars Program August 2023 –Present ●Course sponsored by Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI);Selected as one of 20 high school sophomores,juniors,and seniors chosen from throughout the United States to engage in an intensive study of China;Writing research paper on the implications of China’s environmental mandate and a lack of US-China cooperative environmental efforts NATIONAL SECURITY LANGUAGE INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH,MANDARIN Remote Virtual Scholar August 2023 –Present ●Received a scholarship from the US Department of State to study Mandarin virtually over the course of a semester; Studying critically needed language as part of a cohort of 30 students from across the nation;Engaging with global affairs and cultural exchange with guest speakers and fellow students LEADERSHIP SCIENCE OLYMPIAD President &Founder ●Created first Science Olympiad team in my district;Mentored students in Biological and Earth sciences;Fundraised and received grants for equitable practices and the diversity of our team amounting to over $1000 PROJECT CLIMATE Vice-President (23-24)&Treasurer (22-23) ●Implemented bi-monthly campus cleanups removing about 20 bags of trash quarterly;Planted new greenery on campus through a community garden;Raised over $900 dollars through fundraisers and a community grant SPEECH AND DEBATE Secretar y (23-24)&Treasurer (22-23) ●Established the Speech team with over 25 current competitors;Raised over $1000 dollars through fundraising initiatives;Won awards including 1st at Lions Club Student Speaker Contest (x2),3 time finalist (2nd,4th,6th)at Jon Schamber Invitational,Finalist at GGSA Tournaments,and 2nd place in Poetry Slam and Orator y at El Cerrito Invitational NATIONAL HONORS SOCIETY Treasurer (23-24) ●Led the implementation of multiple ser vice events including a sustainable clothing swap,food drive for a local church, and a clothing drive for victims of California’s flooding HEALTH OCCUPATIONS STUDENTS OF AMERICA (HOSA) Club Representative (22-23) ●Organized a school-wide blood drive in collaboration with our local Red Cross;Facilitated volunteering opportunities to make and distribute sanitary kits for people experiencing homelessness;Placed top 10 within California state HOSA for Cultural Diversity and Disparities in Healthcare as well as Public Speaking ORCHESTRA Musician’s Council (22-23) ●Proficient in playing the Cello for 6 years,first chair of the Cello section;Actively contributed to the Musician’s Council in organizing concerts,field trips,and senior awards;Collaborated to implement a scholarship program for four graduating seniors in the band program ADDITIONAL Technical Skills:Advanced in Python &Java;Experienced in Salesforce,Microsoft Office,&Meta Business Suite Languages:Fluent in English and Hindi;Full professional in Spanish &Chinese (Mandarin) * For identification purposes only CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMISSION 1220 Morello Ave., Suite 100 Martinez CA 94553 2023 MEMBERSHIP ROSTER REPRESENTATIVES MEMBERS (ALTERNATES) EXPIRATION Business Seat #1 * West County Council of Industries * West County Wastewater District Fred Glueck – Chair, D2 Aaron Winer (A) OOC December 31, 2026 December 31, 2026 Business Seat #2 * Industrial Association * Industrial Association Mark Hughes, OOC Amy McTigue (A), D2 December 31, 2025 December 31, 2025 Business Seat #3 * Contra Costa Taxpayers Association * Contra Costa Taxpayers Association Drew Graham, D4 Frank Qin (A), OOC December 31, 2024 December 31, 2024 City Seat #1 * City of Pinole * City of Richmond Antony Tave, D1 Cesar Zepeda, Proposed, D1 December 31, 2026 December 31, 2026 City Seat #2 * City of Richmond * City of Martinez Eduardo Martinez Proposed, D1 Brianne Zorn (A) Proposed, D5 December 31, 2027 December 31, 2027 City Seat #3  City or Richmond  City of Clayton Soheila Bana, D1 Peter Cloven (A), D4 December 31, 2024 December 31, 2024 * For identification purposes only Environmental Engineering Seat * GBR Smith Group * Innovex Environmental Management George Smith, D2 Ron Chinn (A), D2 December 31, 2025 December 31, 2025 Environmental Justice Seat Maureen Brennan, D5 Kevin Hernandez (A) D1 December 31, 2025 December 31, 2025 Environmental Organization Seat # Richmond SE Shoreline Area CAG Clean Water Action Jamin Pursell, D1 Gretchen Salter (A), D4 December 31, 2024 December 31, 2024 Environmental Organization Seat #2 * Concerned Citizens of Crocket and Rodeo * Sustainable Contra Costa Lisa Martell, Proposed,D5 Rohan Tyagi, Proposed, D3 December 31, 2027 December 31, 2027 General Public Seat Tim Bancroft, proposed, D2 Kenneth Luther (A), D2 December 31, 2027 December 31, 2027 Labor Seat #1 * Central Labor Council * Centra Labor Council Julian Vinatieri, OOC Terry Baldwin (A), D4 December 31, 2026 December 31, 2026 Labor Seat #2 * United Steelworkers - Local 5 * United Steelworkers - Local 5 Jim Payne, proposed, D5 Nick Plurkowski, proposed, D5 December 31, 2027 December 31, 2027 League of Women Voters Seat Marielle Boortz, D2 Madeline Kronenberg (A), D1 December 31, 2024 December 31, 2024 Michael Kent, Executive Assistant, (925) 250-3227, mkent@cchealth.org 2/1/24 January 1,2024 Michael Kent Contra Costa Health Services Hazardous Materials Ombudsman 597 Center Avenue,Suite 100 Martinez,CA 94553-4640 michael.kent@hsd.cccounty.us Dear Ombudsman Kent, The Contra Costa Labor Council,AFL-CIO nominates the following as our representatives on the Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission (Term:January 1,2024 – December 31,2027): Labor Seat #2 –USW 5 Jim Payne,Member Nick Plurkowski,Alternate Feel free to reach out should you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Joshua Anijar Executive Director Contra Costa Labor Council,AFL-CIO Cc:Jim Payne (JPayne@usw5.org) Tracy Scott (TScott@usw5.org) Nick Plurkowski (NPlurkowski@usw5.org) Contra Costa Labor Council,AFL-CIO ⧫PO Box 389,Martinez,CA 94553 ⧫(925)357-9447 1/23/24 I’m writing this letter for Lisa Martell as an environmental community group member. The Concerned Citizens of Rodeo and Crockett joined forces in early 2018, with the release of the draft EIR for the Selby Slag remediation, from DTSC. We have continued to meet with Asha Setty of DTSC, and various engineers involved with the project. Lisa has been our ongoing secretary, and arranges meetings with Asha. Our community action group also participated with the Sierra Club, in a project called “Hack the Bay. Our group developed an alternate mitigation plan for the Selby site, and presented it to DTSC last Spring. Community action group members: Maureen Brennan Nancy Rieser Charles Davidson Lisa Martell Ann Puntch Heidi Petty Jay Gunkelman Asha Setty Amanda Lourie Maureen Brennan 510-245-2788 Sustainable Contra Costa | 501c3 Nonprofit Organization - Tax ID #30-0670501 www.sustainablecoco.org | info@sustainablecoco.org | 2156 Stewart Ave, Walnut Creek 94596 January 25, 2024 Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission 597 Center Avenue, Suite 200 Martinez CA 94553 Attention Fred Gluck, Hazardous Materials Commission Chairperson: Sustainable Contra Costa is pleased to sponsor Rohan Tyagi for the Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Commission Environmental Organization Alternate Seat. Rohan is Vice Chair of Sustainable Contra Costa’s Sustainable Leaders in Action (SLIA) program, where he helps lead our team of young interns and SLIA members working on sustainability projects. Some of his accomplishments include: initiating and planning environmental policy workshops within classrooms in Contra Costa; moderated and connected with professionals at Climate Careers Chats; writing for the SLIA newsletter; managed communications and media output for SLIA's social media channels; and planning a sustainable career oriented summer camp for youth. Sustainable Contra Costa is a community of citizens, educators, innovators, and organizations working together for ecologically sustainable, economically vibrant, and socially just communities for all. Since 2008, SCOCO has grown into one of the broadest reaching nonprofits in Contra Costa, providing tools and resources that enable people to take meaningful actions. We help thousands of people each year learn to live more sustainably and make changes to save water and energy, reduce waste, grow food, and build healthy, resilient communities. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Tina Neuhausel, President & CEO, Sustainable Contra Costa 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0490 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Natalie Oleas to the District IV Alternate Seat on the Measure X Community Advisory Board for a term ending March 31, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Carlson. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Ken Carlson, District IV Supervisor Report Title:APPOINT Natalie Oleas to the District IV Alternate Seat on the Measure X Community Advisory Board for a term ending March 31, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Carlson. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT the following individual to the District IV Alternate Seat on the Measure X Community Advisory Board for a term ending on March 31, 2025. Natalie Oleas Concord, Ca FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The voters passed Measure X, a ½ cent sales tax levied countywide (exempting food sales), in November 2020. Collection of the sales tax began April 1, 2021 and was available for distribution starting in FY 2021-22.  The Board of Supervisors approved the creation of a 17-member Community Advisory Board to recommend funding priorities of annual revenue received under Measure X funds, directed the County Administrator to return to the Board of Supervisors with a process to move forward in soliciting applications and seating members on the Community Advisory Board, and further directed that the Advisory Board be a Brown Act body that is staffed by the County Administrator's Office.The Measure X Community Advisory Board was established by the Board of Supervisors on February 2, 2021 to advise the Board of Supervisors on the use of Measure X transactions and use tax funds. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0490,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: District IV Alternate Seat will remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0491 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:12/22/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Elizabeth Leddy, a Lafayette resident, to the District II seat on the Contra Costa County Aviation Advisory Committee for a term ending February 28, 2027, effective March 1, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Report Title:APPOINTMENT TO THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AVIATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Elizabeth Leddy, a Lafayette resident, to the District II seat on the Contra Costa County Aviation Advisory Committee for a three-year term with an expiration date of February 28, 2027, effective March 1, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Candace Andersen. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE BACKGROUND: The Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC) was established by the Board of Supervisors to provide advice and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on the aviation issues related to the economic viability and security of airports in Contra Costa County. The AAC is mandated to cooperate with local, state, and national aviation interests for the safe and orderly operation of airports; advance and promote the interests of aviation; and protect the general welfare of the people living and working near the airport and the County in general. The AAC may initiate discussions, observations, or investigations and may hear comments on airport and aviation matters from the public or other agencies in order to formulate recommendations to the Board. In conjunction with all of the above, the Aviation Advisory Committee provides a forum for the Director of Airports regarding policy matters at and around the airport. The AAC is composed of 11 members who must be County residents: one appointed by each Supervisor; one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Concord; one from and nominated to the Board by the City of Pleasant Hill; one from and nominated to the Board by Diablo Valley College; one from and nominated to the Board by the Contra Costa County Airports Business Association; and two at large to represent the general CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0491,Version:1 community, to be nominated to the Internal Operations Committee by the Aviation Advisory Committee. At least one of the above shall be a member of the Airport Land Use Commission. Terms for AAC seats are three years ending each February 28th. Supervisor Andersen advertised the seat, received one application, met with the applicant and feels Ms. Leddy will be a positive addition to the Committee. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The District 2 Seat will be vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0492 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Debi Mackey to the District V Alternate Seat on the Assessment Appeals Board for a term ending September 7, 2026, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Report Title:APPOINT Debi Mackey to the Assessment Appeals Board to the District V Seat ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Debi Mackey to the District V Alternate Seat on the Assessment Appeals Board for a term ending September 7, 2026, as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Assessment Appeals Board is established to assess and equalize the valuation of the taxable property in the County for the purpose of taxation; and to perform all duties required by the State Board of Equalization and State law. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Position would remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0492,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0493 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/26/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Peter Baker to the Aviation Advisory Committee, Pacheco Neighbor Seat to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. (No fiscal impact) Attachments:1. Baker Peter (AAC) Redacted Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Airports Committee Report Title:Appoint Peter Baker to the Aviation Advisory Committee, Pacheco Neighbor Seat ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Peter Baker to the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC),Pacheco Neighbor Seat to a term beginning March 1, 2024, and expiring February 28, 2027, as recommended by the Airport Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact BACKGROUND: The Aviation Advisory Committee provides a forum for the Director of Airports regarding policy matters at and around the airport. The AAC is comprised of thirteen members appointed by the Board of Supervisors who must work and/or reside in Contra Costa County.The membership of the AAC consists of:1)one member nominated by each of the five members of the Board of Supervisors;2)one member nominated by the City of Concord;3)one member nominated by the City of Pleasant Hill;4)one member nominated by the Contra Costa County Airport Business Association;5)one member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives in the vicinity of Buchanan Field Airport;6)one member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives in the vicinity of the Byron Airport;and 7)three At Large members nominated by the Airport Committee representing the general community. The Airport Committee conducted interviews during its January 22,2024,meeting and recommended the appointment of Peter Baker to the Pacheco Neighbor Seat with a term beginning March 1,2024,and ending on CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0493,Version:1 February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Pacheco Neighbor Seat on the Aviation Advisory Committee will remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Submit Date: Oct 01, 2023 First Name Middle Initial Last Name Home Address Suite or Apt City State Postal Code Primary Phone Email Address Employer Job Title Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions Application Form Profile District Locator Tool Resident of Supervisorial District: District 5 Length of Employment 4 years Do you work in Contra Costa County? Yes No If Yes, in which District do you work? 5 How long have you lived or worked in Contra Costa County? 20+ years Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? Yes No Board and Interest Which Boards would you like to apply for? Aviation Advisory Committee: Submitted Peter Baker Pacheco CA 94553 Chime Inc Sr Director of Engineering Peter Baker Seat Name Airport Neighbor - Pacheco Have you ever attended a meeting of the advisory board for which you are applying? Yes No If Yes, how many meetings have you attended? Education Select the option that applies to your high school education * G.E.D. Certificate College/ University A Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University B Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded? Yes No College/ University C Name of College Attended Degree Type / Course of Study / Major Degree Awarded? Yes No Other Trainings & Occupational Licenses Peter Baker Upload a Resume Other Training A Private Pilot Certificate Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Other Training B Certificate Awarded for Training? Yes No Occupational Licenses Completed: Qualifications and Volunteer Experience Please explain why you would like to serve on this particular board, commitee, or commission. As someone with an active interest and engagement in aviation, and who lives very close to the airport, I am interested in helping be a voice and support for Pacheco & aviation. I have read through the last year of minutes and many of the topics are very interesting and I would be willing to help out where I can. Describe your qualifications for this appointment. (NOTE: you may also include a copy of your resume with this application) I am a long time (20 years) homeowner in Pacheco and an active aviation community member. I am currently a member of Hodges Flights Services, NRI Flying Club, Mount Diablo Pilots Association, and EAA chapter 393 all doing business out of Buchanan Airfield. I am currently renting a hanger on the east ramp and building an experimental aircraft. I have been working professionally in technology for 20+ years and currently work from home for a SF based neo-bank, Chime. In my professional capacity I support a 90+ person organization focusing on data science. For my professional resume please see Would you like to be considered for appointment to other advisory bodies for which you may be qualified? Yes No Do you have any obligations that might affect your attendance at scheduled meetings? Yes No Peter Baker If Yes, please explain: There are occasions where I may need to travel out of the area for work but would likely be able to attend via Zoom. Are you currently or have you ever been appointed to a Contra Costa County advisory board? Yes No If Yes, please list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you are currently serving: If Yes, please also list the Contra Costa County advisory board(s) on which you have previously served: List any volunteer or community experience, including any advisory boards on which you have served. I am a volunteer in our local EAA Chapter 393 helping with their information technology. Conflict of Interest and Certification Do you have a familial or financial relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please refer to the relationships listed under the "Important Information" section below or Resolution No. 2021/234) Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relationships? Yes No If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: Peter Baker Please Agree with the Following Statement I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and undersand that all information in this application is publicly accessible. I understand that misstatements and/or omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a board, committee, or commission in Contra Costa County. I Agree Important Information 1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270). 2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by Contra Costa County. 3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234. 4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation. 5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month. 6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additional commitment of time. 7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships: (1) Mother, father, son, and daughter; (2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter; (3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter; (4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297; (5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner; (6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate. Peter Baker 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0494 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Eduardo Torres to the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council Seat 6 for a term ending December 31, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Report Title:APPOINT Eduardo Torres to the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Eduardo Torres to the District V seat 6 on the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council with a term to expiring December 31, 2024 as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council serves to advise the Board of Supervisors or other local government agencies on issues and concerns related to the unincorporated area of Bay Point. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat would remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0494,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0495 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Isabel Renggenathen to the District V Seat on the Family and Children's Trust Committee for a term ending September 30, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Report Title:APPOINT Isabel Renggenathen to the Family and Children's Trust Committee ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Isabel Renggenathen to the Family and Children's Trust Committee, District V Seat, with a term to expire September 30, 2025 as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Family and Children’s Trust Committee (FACT) was established in 1985 by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to make funding recommendations on the allocation of specific funds for the prevention and treatment of child abuse and neglect and supportive services for families and children. Funding for FACT supported projects derived from federal and state program legislation, and donations to the County’s Family and Children’s Trust Fund. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat would remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0495,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0496 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Contesa Tate to the District V Seat 1 on the Contra Costa County Mental Health Commission for a term ending June 30, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Report Title:APPOINT Contesa Tate to the Contra Costa County Mental Health Commission, District V - Seat 1 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Contesa Tate to the Contra Costa County Mental Health Commission, District V - Seat 1 on the Contra Costa County Mental Health Commission with a term expiring June 30, 2024, as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Mental Health Commission was established by order of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on June 22, 1993, pursuant to the Welfare & Institutions Code 5604, also known as the Bronzan-McCorquodale Act, Stats. 1992, c. 1374 (A.B. 14). The primary purpose of the Commission is to serve in an advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors and to the Mental Health Division and its staff. Commissioners are appointed by members of the County Board of Supervisors from each of the five districts for a term of three years. Each district has a consumer of mental health services, family member and an at-large representative on the Commission, for a total of 15 members plus a representative from the Board of Supervisors. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat would remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0496,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0497 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Kanwar Singh to the District V Public Sector Seat on the Economic Opportunity Council to a term expiring June 30, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Report Title:Appoint Kanwar Singh to the District V, Public Sector Seat, on the Economic Opportunity Council ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Kanwar Singh to the District V Public Sector Seat on the Economic Opportunity Council to a term expiring June 30, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Economic Opportunity Council makes recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on all program proposals and budgets related to Community Services Block Grant and the Weatherization program, and performs other functions as specified in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The seat would remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0497,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0498 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Gene Jackson to the District V Alternate Seat on the Measure X Community Advisory Board for a term ending March 31, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Report Title:Appointment to the Measure X Community Advisory Board ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Gene Jackson to the Measure X Community Advisory Board, District V Alternate Seat with a term to expire March 31, 2025 as recommended by Supervisor Federal D. Glover. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: The Measure X Community Advisory Board was established by the Board of Supervisors on February 2, 2021 to advise the Board of Supervisors on the use of Measure X transactions and use tax funds. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Seat would remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0498,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0499 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and ADOPT revisions to the Integrated Pest Management Policy and Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee Bylaws, as recommended by the Internal Operations Committee. (No fiscal impact) Attachments:1. 2024 0202 IPM Policy_DRAFT _Tracked Changes, 2. 2024 0202 IPM Policy_DRAFT _Clean Copy, 3. 2024 0202 IPM Bylaws_DRAFT_Tracked Changes, 4. 2024 0202 IPM Bylaws_DRAFT_Clean Copy, 5. IPMAC Membership Slides 2024 0227.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Internal Operations Committee Report Title:PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT POLICY AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE BYLAWS ☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and ADOPT revisions to the Integrated Pest Management Policy and Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee Bylaws. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The IOC reviews proposed changes to the bylaws of various advisory bodies to the Board of Supervisors. The Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee (IPMAC) recently reviewed its bylaws in the context of the IPM Policy, and has recommended changes, primarily to remove duplicative language between the two documents, to reflect the IPMAC’s desire to restore the seat representing the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources (UCANR), and to designate all seats as voting members. Prior to 2009, the IPM Task Force had a designated UC seat. An ad hoc IPMAC subcommittee was formed on July 21, 2022 to review potential modifications to the bylaws. That subcommittee met four times from September through November in 2022. Since several portions of the bylaws are also written verbatim in the IPM Policy, the subcommittee proposed edits to that document to eliminate unnecessary duplication. The revisions also added clarity by placing previously duplicative phrases into the most appropriate document. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0499,Version:1 Various membership arrangements were considered, and IPMAC ultimately approved the version that eliminates the following seats: •Public Member-Alternate •Public Works Facilities Director or Designee •Public Works Deputy Director or Designee •Health Services Department Representative The following seats are proposed to be added: •University of California Representative •Public Works Director or Designee Other changes include: •The designation of all seats as voting seats (currently only public member seats and two staff seats can vote). •Duplicative language found in both documents has been removed from one and preserved in the most applicable document. •Other minor edits, clarifications and citations have been added to both documents. Personnel from the County Administrator’s Office and County Counsel reviewed the draft documents and made additional edits. Proposed modifications and other adjustments were approved by IPMAC on January 18, 2024 and proposed to the Internal Operations Committee at a special meeting held on February 2, 2024. Tracked changes and clean copy versions of the bylaws and policy are attached along with slides that depict the proposed changes to IPMAC membership. The IOC supports the recommendation to make all seats voting seats because of the past difficulty with regularly achieving a voting quorum, exacerbated by AB 2449, which regulates remote meeting attendance. Achieving a voting quorum under the current construct requires significant juggling and is inefficient. Vice Chair Andersen asked for any history about why some of the County staff seats were originally designated as non-voting. Wade Finlinson, Health Services IPM Coordinator, explained that since the Advisory Committee serves as a resource to County departments in an advisory capacity, operational staff may as well be able to vote. Chair Burgis was concerned about the proposed elimination of the Health Services Department seat since public health is the focus of the IPM policy. Mr. Finlinson explained that Health Services prefers to serve as an informal technical liaison to the Advisory Committee and committed to establish a protocol to keep Health Services informed of issues being discussed by the Advisory Committee so that Health can provide relevant information and advice. The IOC unanimously approved the recommended modifications to the IPM Policy and IPM Advisory Committee Bylaws and proffers those recommendations to the Board today. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Status quo. Current composition would remain. Challenges in achieving a voting quorum would continue, and duplicative language between the IPM Policy and Advisory Committee bylaws would remain, requiring continual harmonization whenever one document is changed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 2/2/24 DRAFT 1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT POLICY 2/2/24 DRAFT (Tracked Changes) To protect public health, Ccounty resources and the environment, it will beis the policy of Contra Costa County to manage pests within Ccounty pest management programs in and on Ccounty- maintained properties and facilities, using Integrated Pest Management (IPM) principles and techniques. The mission is to promote the combined use of physical, cultural, biological and chemical control methods to effectively manage pests with minimal risk to humans and the environment. For the purposes of this policy, the County adopts the Integrated Pest Management definition provided by the University of California Statewide IPM Project: Integrated Pest Management is an ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties. Pesticides are used only after monitoring indicates that they are needed according to established guidelines, and treatments are made with the goal of removing only the target organisms. Pest control materials are selected and applied in a manner that minimizes risks to human health, to beneficial and non-target organisms, and to the environment. The goals of this countywide policy are to: 1.Minimize risks and maximize benefits to the general public, staff and the environment as a result of pest control activities conducted by County staff and contractors. 2.Create, implement and periodically review written IPM plans in the Agriculture, Health, and Public Works applicable County Departments specific to their operational needs and consistent with the U.C. definition above and this policy. 3.Promote availability, public awareness and public input into written county pest management plans and records. 4.Create public awareness of IPM through education. To achieve these goals the County has established the following objectives 1.Require County departments to routinely use Integrated Pest Management IPM. 2.Require County pest control contracts to incorporate County IPM policies and practices. 2/2/24 DRAFT 2 3. Require applicable Departments to report annually on the development and implementation of IPM programs. 4. Maintain a County IPM Coordinator position that reports to the County Administrator and Board of Supervisors. 5. Maintain an IPM Advisory Committee that provides advice to the Board of Supervisors and assists Departments in reviewing pest control alternatives and related costs or impacts. 6. Provide annual IPM training and outreach programs to address the needs of County Departments and employees. Require County Departments to Routinely Use Integrated Pest Management: • The Agriculture, Health, and Public Works County Departments who that manage pests are required to develop one or more a written IPM Plans, or theits equivalent, and designate an a departmental/divisional1 IPM Coordinator responsible for implementation. • Department Heads, or their designees shall solicit input from the IPM Advisory Committee on the development and ongoing refinement of departmental/divisional IPM plans and decision-making documentation. Require County Pest Control Contracts to Incorporate County IPM Policies and Practices • All County Departments that contract for pest management services will shall ensure that County IPM policies and practices are incorporated into contracts and adhered to by all licensed pest control contractors performing work on Ccounty- maintained properties and facilities. Such contracts shall also include a provision requiring the contractor to use IPM principles and techniques in their service delivery. Prospective contractors should be provided a copy of this policy during the bidding process. Require Departments to Report Annually on the Development and Implementation of IPM Programs. • It is understood that IPM programs are continually evolving.development and implementation of IPM programs will take time. DTherefore, departmental/divisional IPM Coordinators shall prepare annual reports on department pest control activities to the County Administrator. The department 1 The term “departmental/divisional” is used to broadly convey the spectrum of organizational units with IPM responsibilities under this policy. Disparate pest management functions within large departments may be better suited for the implementation of divisional IPM plans and designated divisional IPM coordinators in order to accurately represent considerations unique to specific work units. Departmental IPM plans and coordinators are best suited for small or mid-size departments that manage pests within a single program. 2/2/24 DRAFT 3 annual reports will be reviewed by the IPM Advisory Committee. The IPM Advisory Committee shall compile the information into an annual report that will be submitted to the County Administrator and the Board of Supervisors. Maintain a County IPM Coordinator Position that Reports to the Board of Supervisors. • In recognition that development, implementation and oversight of a County IPM Program requires allocation of resources, the position of County IPM Coordinator has been established and funded. The County IPM Coordinator serves as a resource for Department Heads to ensure compliance with the County IPM policy. The County IPM Coordinator is required to serve as staff to the IPM Advisory Committee to assist Department Heads in identifying priorities and in acquiring data to properly evaluate pest control needs and appropriate solutions. • The County IPM Coordinator will provide an annual update to the County Fish and Wildlife Committee. Maintain an IPM Advisory Committee that Provides Advice to the Board of Supervisors and Assists Departments in Reviewing Pest Control Alternatives and Related Costs or Impacts. • An IPM Advisory Committee has been created. The Advisory Committee will serves as a resource to help both Department Heads and the Board of Supervisors periodically review, update, and improve existing programs and the processes used for making pest management decisions. The membership of the Committee shall be composed of the following: 1. Four (4) ex-officio, non-voting members as follows: a. Agricultural Commissioner, or designee b. Public Works Facilities Maintenance Manager, or designee c. Public Works Deputy Director, or designee d. A current Structural Pest Management contractor with the Public Works Department 2. Eight (8) voting members as follows: a. Two (2) ex-officio members: i. Health Services Department representative ii. County/Unincorporated County Storm Water Program representative b. Six (6) public members: i. Sustainability Commission representative ii. County Fish and Wildlife Committee representative iii. Three (3) Type 2, “At Large Appointments,” iv. One (1) Type 3, “At Large Appointment,” for an environmental organization with either 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) status 3. One (1) Type 3, “At Large Appointment” for a Public Member – Alternate. 2/2/24 DRAFT 4 • The IPM Advisory Committee may form subcommittees of its members to research and explore specific issues that come before the Committee. The goal of a subcommittee is to provide a working forum for interaction and for information exchange among experts and staff focusing on issues needing in-depth consideration. • The IPM Advisory Committee may use Technical Advisory Committees to develop information regarding pest control decisions. The IPM Technical Advisory Committee may include representatives from the East Bay Regional Park District, Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District, Contra Costa Water District, the University of California Cooperative Extension, Pesticide Applicators Professional Association and/or Pest Control Operators of California and other appropriate representatives with expertise in a specific field. • Information regarding preferred pest control solutions must include data regarding comparative efficacy, cost, environmental impact and hazards to the public and applicator. Information and recommendations must be based on the best science available. • The IPM Advisory Committee will also work with the County IPM Coordinator to develop IPM training programs for County Departments and, their employees, and applicable vendors and contractors to assist in compliance with the Ccounty’s IPM policy. Additional support could may also be provided to County Departments who wish to develop public outreach programs to address environmental and public health concerns. • The membership of the IPM Advisory Committee is detailed in the IPM Committee bylaws. Provide Annual IPM Training and Outreach Programs to Address the Needs of County Departments and Employees. • Training programs will be developed under the direction of the County IPM Coordinator with the concurrence of the IPM Advisory Committee to ensure that County employees understand IPM techniques and County policy. Utilizing resources such as the U.C. Pest Management Guidelines that have been developed by the University of California Statewide IPM Program, training classes on integrated pest management techniques will be developed and made available for County employees. • Public outreach programs to address environmental and public health concerns will also be developed to complement existing Ccounty programs. 2/2/24 DRAFT 1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT POLICY 2/2/24 DRAFT (Clean Copy) To protect public health, County resources and the environment, it is the policy of Contra Costa County to manage pests within County pest management programs in and on County-maintained properties and facilities, using Integrated Pest Management (IPM) principles and techniques. The mission is to promote the combined use of physical, cultural, biological and chemical control methods to effectively manage pests with minimal risk to humans and the environment. For the purposes of this policy, the County adopts the Integrated Pest Management definition provided by the University of California Statewide IPM Project: Integrated Pest Management is an ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties. Pesticides are used only after monitoring indicates that they are needed according to established guidelines, and treatments are made with the goal of removing only the target organism. Pest control materials are selected and applied in a manner that minimizes risks to human health, beneficial and non-target organisms, and the environment. The goals of this countywide policy are to: 1.Minimize risks and maximize benefits to the general public, staff and the environment as a result of pest control activities conducted by County staff and contractors. 2.Create, implement and periodically review written IPM plans in applicable County Departments specific to their operational needs and consistent with the U.C. definition above and this policy. 3.Promote availability, public awareness and public input into written county pest management plans and records. 4.Create public awareness of IPM through education. To achieve these goals the County has established the following objectives 1.Require County departments to routinely use IPM. 2.Require County pest control contracts to incorporate County IPM policies and practices. 3.Require applicable Departments to report annually on the development and implementation of IPM programs. 4.Maintain a County IPM Coordinator position that reports to the County 2/2/24 DRAFT 2 Administrator and Board of Supervisors. 5. Maintain an IPM Advisory Committee that provides advice to the Board of Supervisors and assists Departments in reviewing pest control alternatives and related costs or impacts. 6. Provide annual IPM training and outreach programs to address the needs of County Departments and employees. Require County Departments to Routinely Use Integrated Pest Management: • County Departments that manage pests are required to develop one or more written IPM Plans, or the equivalent, and designate a departmental/divisional1 IPM Coordinator responsible for implementation. • Department Heads, or their designees shall solicit input from the IPM Advisory Committee on the development and ongoing refinement of departmental/divisional IPM plans and decision-making documentation. Require County Pest Control Contracts to Incorporate County IPM Policies and Practices • All County Departments that contract for pest management services shall ensure that County IPM policies and practices are incorporated into contracts and adhered to by all licensed pest control contractors performing work on County- maintained properties and facilities. Such contracts shall also include a provision requiring the contractor to use IPM principles and techniques in their service delivery. Prospective contractors should be provided a copy of this policy during the bidding process. Require Departments to Report Annually on the Development and Implementation of IPM Programs. • Therefore, departmental/divisional IPM Coordinators shall prepare annual reports on department pest control activities to the County Administrator. The department annual reports will be reviewed by the IPM Advisory Committee. The IPM Advisory Committee shall compile the information into an annual report that will be submitted to the County Administrator and the Board of Supervisors. Maintain a County IPM Coordinator Position that Reports to the Board of Supervisors. • In recognition that development, implementation and oversight of a County IPM Program requires allocation of resources, the position of County IPM Coordinator 1 The term “departmental/divisional” is used to broadly convey the spectrum of organizational units with IPM responsibilities under this policy. Disparate pest management functions within large departments may be better suited for the implementation of divisional IPM plans and designated divisional IPM coordinators in order to accurately represent considerations unique to specific work units. Departmental IPM plans and coordinators are best suited for small or mid-size departments that manage pests within a single program. 2/2/24 DRAFT 3 has been established and funded. The County IPM Coordinator serves as a resource for Department Heads to ensure compliance with the County IPM policy. The County IPM Coordinator is required to serve as staff to the IPM Advisory Committee to assist Department Heads in identifying priorities and in acquiring data to properly evaluate pest control needs and appropriate solutions. • The County IPM Coordinator will provide an annual update to the County Fish and Wildlife Committee. Maintain an IPM Advisory Committee that Provides Advice to the Board of Supervisors and Assists Departments in Reviewing Pest Control Alternatives and Related Costs or Impacts. • An IPM Advisory Committee has been created. The Advisory Committee serves as a resource to help both Department Heads and the Board of Supervisors periodically review, update, and improve existing programs and the processes used for making pest management decisions. • Information regarding preferred pest control solutions must include data regarding comparative efficacy, cost, environmental impact and hazards to the public and applicator. Information and recommendations must be based on the best science available. • The IPM Advisory Committee will also work with the County IPM Coordinator to develop IPM training programs for County Departments, their employees, and applicable vendors and contractors to assist in compliance with the County’s IPM policy. Additional support may also be provided to County Departments who wish to develop public outreach programs to address environmental and public health concerns. • The membership of the IPM Advisory Committee is detailed in the IPM Committee bylaws. Provide Annual IPM Training and Outreach Programs to Address the Needs of County Departments and Employees. • Training programs will be developed under the direction of the County IPM Coordinator with the concurrence of the IPM Advisory Committee to ensure that County employees understand IPM techniques and County policy. Utilizing resources such as the U.C. Pest Management Guidelines that have been developed by the University of California Statewide IPM Program, training classes on integrated pest management techniques will be developed and made available for County employees. • Public outreach programs to address environmental and public health concerns will also be developed to complement existing County programs. IPM Committee Bylaws 1 2/2/24 DRAFT (Tracked Changes) I. Name and Definition A. The name of this advisory body to the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors shall be the “Contra Costa County Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee,” hereafter referred to as the “Committee.” B. “Integrated Pest Management” (hereinafter, “IPM”) is defined as “an ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties. Pesticides are used only after monitoring indicates that they are needed according to established guidelines, and treatments are made with the goal of removing only the target organisms. Pest control materials are selected and applied in a manner that minimizes risks to human health, to beneficial and non-target organisms, and to the environment.” II. Purpose (Mission Statement) The general purposes of the Committee shall be as follows are to: A. Protect and enhance public health, County resources, and the environment; B. Minimize risks and maximize benefits to the general public, staff and the environment as a result of pest control activities conducted by County staff and contractors; C. Promote a coordinated County-wide effort to implement IPM in the County in a manner that is consistent with the Board-adopted IPM Policy; D. Serve as a resource to help Department Heads and the Board of Supervisors review and improve existing pest management programs and the processes for making pest management decisions; Periodically review departmental/divisional IPM plans and continuously monitor implementation of County IPM programs; E. Make policy recommendations upon assessment of current pest issues and evaluation of possible IPM solutions; and F. Provide a forum for communication and information exchange among members in an effort to identify, encourage, and stimulate the use of best or promising pest management practices; and. G. Promote transparency in pest management decision-making by County Departments. III. Membership A. The membership of the Committee shall be composed of eleven (11) voting members as follows: the following: . 1. Four (4) ex-officio, non-voting members as follows: a) Agriculture Commissioner, or designee b) Public Works Facilities Maintenance Manager, or designee c) Public Works Deputy Director, or designee d) A current Structural Pest Management contractor with the Public Works Facilities Maintenance Division 2. Eight (8) voting members as follows: 1a. Four (4)Two (2) ex-officio members: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE BYLAWS IPM Committee Bylaws 2 i. Health Services Department representative ii. i. County/Unincorporated County Storm Water Program representative iii. ii. Agriculture Commissioner, or designee iv. iii. Public Works Director, or designee v. iv. Representative of a current pest control operator under contract with the Public Works Facilities Division 2b. Six (6) public members: i. Sustainability Commission representative ii. County Fish and Wildlife Committee representative iii. Three (3) Type 2 “Public Member At Large Appointments,” iv. One (1) Type 3, At Large Appointment, for an environmental organization with either 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) status 3. One (1) University of California representative One (1) Type 3, “At Large Appointment” for a Public Member—Alternate. B. Membership Requirements 1. Members must reside or work in Contra Costa County. Membership and should reflect the ethnic, racial, and geographical diversity of the County. 2. Contractors who provide pest management services to the County may not serve on the Committee. The exception is A.1.div, above., the current Structural Pest Management Contractor with the Public Works Facilities Maintenance Division. 3. If a member’s work status or residence changes, he/she must notify the Committee in writing, within thirty (30) days of their change in status. The Chair will review the change of status and determine if the member is still eligible for membership according to these by-laws. If they are found to be ineligible, the member will be asked to resign his/her position. 4. Current employees of Contra Costa County are not eligible to serve on the Committee as “At Large Appointments” public members under A.2A.2.iii, A2.iv, A.2.v or as the UC representative under A.3 above. 5. Public members must disclose financial or familial relationships with County employees. C. Responsibilities of Membership Each member must: 1. Have an interest in and commitment to the Purpose (Mission Statement) of the Committee; 2. Demonstrate knowledge of, interest in, and commitment to improvement of IPM practices in Contra Costa County; 3. Attend Committee meetings; 4. Notify the IPM Coordinator, in advance, of any unavoidable absence from a meeting; and 5. Must comply with the Contra Costa County Policy for Board Appointees concerning Conflict of Interest and Open Meetings, Resolution No. 2002/376 and Resolution No. 2021/234. D. Resignation Any member who desires to resign his or hertheir position with the Committee must do so in writing and file it with the Chair and Secretary of the Committee. IV. Staff to the Committee The County IPM Coordinator shall serve as staff to the Committee. Staff shall issue and distribute agendas in accordance with the Brown Act and Better Government Ordinance. Staff shall finalize minutes and distribute to members in the agenda packet. IPM Committee Bylaws 3 V.Organization of the Committee A.Officers: The officers of the Committee shall be the Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary. B.Duties of Officers: 1.It shall be the duty of the Chair to preside at all meetings. 2.In the absence of the Chair, the Vice-Chair shall assume the duties of the Chair. Should both senior officers be unavailable, the Secretary or another member shall preside. 3.The Secretary, or a designee of the Chair, shall take notes at all meetings coordinate with County staff concerning the advisory body’s administrative needs and operating procedures. C.Subcommittees: 1.The purpose of a Subcommittee is to research and explore specific issues in-depth that come before the Committee. 2.The goal of a Subcommittee is to provide a working forum for interaction and information exchange among experts and staff focusing on issues needing in-depth consideration. 3.The Committee Chair shall designate Subcommittee members from the Committee with advice from the Committee. 4.For those issues that are technical in nature, the Subcommittee Chair, with a majority vote from the Subcommittee members, may invite experts from other agencies or institutions, such as East Bay Regional Park District, Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District, Contra Costa Water District, the University of California Cooperative Extension, Pesticide Applicators Professional Association, Association of Applied IPM Ecologists, and/or Pest Control Operators of California and other appropriate representatives with technical expertise in a specific field to attend Subcommittee meetings to provide input and/or report to the Subcommittee. 5.Only the Subcommittee members will have voting rights to make final decisions regarding recommendations to send to the full Committee. VI.Terms/Elections A.Committee: 1.The terms for the Department Representatives ex-officio (see III.A.1.[i]-[iv]) and UC seats (III.A.3) do not expire. The terms for representatives of other County advisory bodies (III.A.2.[i]-[ii]) shall align with the term expiration of their respective appointment to the Sustainability Commission or Fish and Wildlife Committee. All other members (III.A.2.[iii]-[iv]) shall serve for a term of four (4) calendar years. Any vacancies during the term of the member shall be filled for the remainder of that four (4) calendar year term. Members may serve more than one (1) four- year term if reappointed. 2.The Committee shall elect its officers every two (2) years, at the first meeting of each even numbered calendar year. Officers shall be elected by a simple majority of those present. 3.New officers shall assume their duties immediately after the election. 4.Officers shall serve for a term of two (2) years. Any vacancies during the term of the officer shall be filled for the remainder of that two (2) calendar year term. Officers may serve more than one (1)two-year term if re-elected. 5.Should an officer resign, the vacancy will be filled by election at the next regular meeting. 6.Members with two (2) absences in a calendar year may be recommended by the Committee for removal from membership to the Board of Supervisors. 7.Committee vacancies will be filled from the Local Appointments List pursuant toer the Maddy Local Appointive List Act of 1975 (Government Code section 54970, et seq.). (Note: See Resolution No. 2020/1 III.G for additional processes regarding vacancies.) B.Subcommittees: 1.The Committee Chair selects Subcommittee members. IPM Committee Bylaws 4 2. Subcommittee members recommend a Subcommittee chair to the Committee Chair, if needed. VII. Duties of the Committee and Subcommittees A. The general duties of the Committee shall include: 1. Supporting Working with County Departments to create, promote, implement, and periodically evaluate IPM plans, programs, strategies, and policies specific to their operational needs and consistent with the County IPM Policy; 2. Recommending policies; 3. Prioritizing Providing input on the work priorities of the IPM Coordinator; 4. Coordinating Monitoring pest management activities among all areas of the of all applicable County Departments; 5. Forming Subcommittees to assist in the work of the Committee as deemed necessary by the Committee; 6. Promoting ongoing and expanded cross training among departments on IPM issues; 7. Promoting availability, public awareness, and public input into written county pest management programs, protocols, and records; 8. Helping create public awareness of IPM and promote public education on IPM techniques; and 9. Providing an ongoing forum for consensus and resolution of IPM issues. B. The general duties of the Subcommittees shall include: 1. Researching and discussing matters requiring in depth consideration; and 2. Making specific recommendations to the Committee as appropriate. VIII. Meetings/Voting A. The Committee shall agree on a meeting schedule during the first meeting of the calendar year. B. The Committee shall first meeting of the calendar year shall be held meet every other month on the third Thursday of the month January from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. C. All meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public and all interested persons shall be permitted to attend meetings. Time shall be set aside for limited public comment on items not on the posted agenda. D. A notice of the regular meeting, with an attached agenda, shall be posted in a public notice area not less than ninety-six (96) hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to the Brown Act and the Better Government Ordinance. E. “Quorum” is defined as fifty percent plus one a majority of all seats on the Committee, whether vacant or filled. F. A quorum of the total membership (at least 67 members) must be present in order to hold a meeting. In the absence of a quorum, no formal action shall be taken except to adjourn the meeting to a subsequent date. G. Voting at Meetings 1. A quorum of voting members (at least 5 members) must be present before any vote on matters before the Committee can take place. Passage of a matter requires approval by a simple majority of the voting members present, except on matters involving policy recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. 2. Passage of matters involving policy recommendations to the Board of Supervisors requires approval by a number of affirmative votes equal to or greater than the total quorum of the body simple majority of the total number of voting members (at least 65 members). 3. The Public Member—Alternate may vote only if a member listed in III. Membership A.2.b, above, is absent. Otherwise, the Public Member—Alternate may not vote on matters before the Committee. IPM Committee Bylaws 5 IX. Bylaws/Amendments These bylaws will govern the membership, organization, and meetings of the Committee. These bylaws may be amended by majority vote at any regular Committee meeting, a quorum being present, with prior notice to the membership. Changes to bylaws shall not be operative until they have been approved by the Board of Supervisors. X. Annual Objectives The Committee shall review and adopt annual objectives at the first meeting of the calendar year. XI. Reports to the Board of Supervisors The Committee shall submit a status report on the activities of the Committee as directed, but no less frequently than annually, to the Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee of the Board of Supervisors. In addition, the Committee shall submit an annual report to the County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Section IV of Resolution No. 2020/12002/377 (6/18/02). XII. Committee Records Records of the Committee shall be housed at the office of the IPM Coordinator. Meeting agendas and minutes shall be posted online on the Contra Costa County website. IPM Committee Bylaws 1 2/2/24 DRAFT (Clean Copy) I. Name and Definition A. The name of this advisory body to the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors shall be the “Contra Costa County Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee,” hereafter referred to as the “Committee.” B. “Integrated Pest Management” (hereinafter, “IPM”) is defined as “an ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties. Pesticides are used only after monitoring indicates that they are needed according to established guidelines, and treatments are made with the goal of removing only the target organism. Pest control materials are selected and applied in a manner that minimizes risks to human health, beneficial and non-target organisms, and the environment.” II. Purpose (Mission Statement) The general purposes of the Committee are to: A. Protect and enhance public health, County resources, and the environment; B. Minimize risks and maximize benefits to the general public, staff and the environment as a result of pest control activities conducted by County staff and contractors; C. Promote a coordinated County-wide effort to implement IPM in the County in a manner that is consistent with the Board-adopted IPM Policy; D. Periodically review departmental/divisional IPM plans and continuously monitor implementation of County IPM programs; E. Make policy recommendations upon assessment of current pest issues and evaluation of possible IPM solutions; F. Provide a forum for communication and information exchange among members in an effort to identify, encourage, and stimulate the use of best or promising pest management practices; and G. Promote transparency in pest management decision-making by County Departments. III. Membership A. The Committee shall be composed of eleven (11) voting members as follows: 1. Four (4) ex-officio members: i. County/Unincorporated County Storm Water Program representative ii. Agriculture Commissioner, or designee iii. Public Works Director, or designee iv. Representative of a current pest control operator under contract with the Public Works Facilities Division 2. Six (6) public members: i. Sustainability Commission representative ii. County Fish and Wildlife Committee representative iii. Three (3) Public Member At Large Appointments, iv. One (1) At Large Appointment, for an environmental organization with either 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) status 3. One (1) University of California representative CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE BYLAWS IPM Committee Bylaws 2 B. Membership Requirements 1. Members must reside or work in Contra Costa County. Membership should reflect the ethnic, racial, and geographical diversity of the County. 2. Contractors who provide pest management services to the County may not serve on the Committee. The exception is A.1.iv, above. 3. If a member’s work status or residence changes, he/she must notify the Committee in writing, within thirty (30) days of their change in status. The Chair will review the change of status and determine if the member is still eligible for membership according to these by-laws. If they are found to be ineligible, the member will be asked to resign his/her position. 4. Current employees of Contra Costa County are not eligible to serve on the Committee as public members under A.2 or as the UC representative under A.3 above. 5. Public members must disclose financial or familial relationships with County employees. C. Responsibilities of Membership Each member must: 1. Have an interest in and commitment to the Purpose (Mission Statement) of the Committee; 2. Demonstrate knowledge of, interest in, and commitment to improvement of IPM practices in Contra Costa County; 3. Attend Committee meetings; 4. Notify the IPM Coordinator, in advance, of any unavoidable absence from a meeting; and 5. Must comply with the Contra Costa County Policy for Board Appointees concerning Conflict of Interest and Open Meetings, Resolution No. 2002/376 and Resolution No. 2021/234. D. Resignation Any member who desires to resign their position with the Committee must do so in writing and file it with the Chair and Secretary of the Committee. IV. Staff to the Committee The County IPM Coordinator shall serve as staff to the Committee. Staff shall issue and distribute agendas in accordance with the Brown Act and Better Government Ordinance. Staff shall finalize minutes and distribute to members in the agenda packet. V. Organization of the Committee A. Officers: The officers of the Committee shall be the Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary. B. Duties of Officers: 1. It shall be the duty of the Chair to preside at all meetings. 2. In the absence of the Chair, the Vice-Chair shall assume the duties of the Chair. Should both senior officers be unavailable, the Secretary or another member shall preside. 3. The Secretary shall coordinate with County staff concerning the advisory body’s administrative needs and operating procedures. C. Subcommittees: 1. The purpose of a Subcommittee is to research and explore specific issues in-depth that come before the Committee. 2. The goal of a Subcommittee is to provide a working forum for interaction and information exchange among experts and staff focusing on issues needing in-depth consideration. 3. The Committee Chair shall designate Subcommittee members from the Committee with advice from the Committee. 4. For those issues that are technical in nature, the Subcommittee Chair, with a majority vote from the Subcommittee members, may invite experts from other agencies or institutions, such as East Bay Regional Park District, Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District, Contra Costa IPM Committee Bylaws 3 Water District, the University of California Cooperative Extension, Pesticide Applicators Professional Association, Association of Applied IPM Ecologists, and/or Pest Control Operators of California and other appropriate representatives with technical expertise in a specific field to attend Subcommittee meetings to provide input and/or report to the Subcommittee. 5. Only the Subcommittee members will have voting rights to make final decisions regarding recommendations to send to the full Committee. VI.Terms/Elections A.Committee: 1.The terms for ex-officio (see III.A.1.[i]-[iv]) and UC seats (III.A.3) do not expire. The terms for representatives of other County advisory bodies (III.A.2.[i]-[ii]) shall align with the term expiration of their respective appointment to the Sustainability Commission or Fish and Wildlife Committee. All other members (III.A.2.[iii]-[iv]) shall serve for a term of four (4) calendar years. Any vacancies during the term of the member shall be filled for the remainder of that term. Members may serve more than one (1) term if reappointed. 2.The Committee shall elect its officers every two (2) years, at the first meeting of each even numbered calendar year. Officers shall be elected by a simple majority of those present. 3.New officers shall assume their duties immediately after the election. 4.Officers shall serve for a term of two (2) years. Any vacancies during the term of the officer shall be filled for the remainder of that two (2) calendar year term. Officers may serve more than one (1)two-year term if re-elected. 5.Should an officer resign, the vacancy will be filled by election at the next regular meeting. 6.Members with two (2) absences in a calendar year may be recommended by the Committee for removal from membership to the Board of Supervisors. 7.Committee vacancies will be filled from the Local Appointments List pursuant to the Maddy Local Appointive List Act of 1975 (Government Code section 54970, et seq.). (Note: See Resolution No. 2020/1 III.G for additional processes regarding vacancies.) B.Subcommittees: 1.The Committee Chair selects Subcommittee members. 2.Subcommittee members recommend a Subcommittee chair to the Committee Chair, if needed. VII.Duties of the Committee and Subcommittees A.The general duties of the Committee shall include: 1.Supporting County Departments to create, promote, implement, and periodically evaluate IPM plans, programs, strategies, and policies specific to their operational needs and consistent with the County IPM Policy; 2.Recommending policies; 3.Providing input on the work priorities of the IPM Coordinator; 4.Monitoring pest management activities of all applicable County Departments; 5.Forming Subcommittees to assist in the work of the Committee as deemed necessary by the Committee; 6.Promoting ongoing and expanded cross training among departments on IPM issues; 7.Promoting availability, public awareness, and public input into written county pest management programs, protocols, and records; 8.Helping create public awareness of IPM and promote public education on IPM techniques; and 9.Providing an ongoing forum for consensus and resolution of IPM issues. B.The general duties of the Subcommittees shall include: 1.Researching and discussing matters requiring in depth consideration; and 2.Making specific recommendations to the Committee as appropriate. IPM Committee Bylaws 4 VIII. Meetings/Voting A. The Committee shall agree on a meeting schedule during the first meeting of the calendar year. The first meeting of the calendar year shall be held on the third Thursday of January from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. B. All meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public and all interested persons shall be permitted to attend meetings. Time shall be set aside for limited public comment on items not on the posted agenda. C. A notice of the regular meeting, with an attached agenda, shall be posted in a public notice area not less than ninety-six (96) hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to the Brown Act and the Better Government Ordinance. D. “Quorum” is defined as a majority of all seats on the Committee, whether vacant or filled. E. A quorum of the total membership (at least 6 members) must be present in order to hold a meeting. In the absence of a quorum, no formal action shall be taken except to adjourn the meeting to a subsequent date. F. Voting at Meetings 1. A quorum must be present before any vote on matters before the Committee can take place. Passage of a matter requires approval by a simple majority of the members present, except on matters involving policy recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. 2. Passage of matters involving policy recommendations to the Board of Supervisors requires approval by a number of affirmative votes equal to or greater than the total quorum of the body (at least 6 members). IX. Bylaws/Amendments These bylaws will govern the membership, organization, and meetings of the Committee. These bylaws may be amended by majority vote at any regular Committee meeting, a quorum being present, with prior notice to the membership. Changes to bylaws shall not be operative until they have been approved by the Board of Supervisors. X. Annual Objectives The Committee shall review and adopt annual objectives at the first meeting of the calendar year. XI. Reports to the Board of Supervisors The Committee shall submit a status report on the activities of the Committee as directed, but no less frequently than annually, to the Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee of the Board of Supervisors. In addition, the Committee shall submit an annual report to the County Board of Supervisors in accordance with Resolution No. 2020/1. XII. Committee Records Records of the Committee shall be housed at the office of the IPM Coordinator. Meeting agendas and minutes shall be posted online on the Contra Costa County website. 1 2 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0500 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE amendments to the Aviation Advisory Committee bylaws as recommended by the Aviation Advisory Committee. (No fiscal impact) Attachments:1. AAC ByLaws-2024 Amendment Redline.pdf, 2. AAC ByLaws-2024 Amendment Clean Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Greg Baer, Director of Airports Report Title:Aviation Advisory Committee Bylaws Amendments ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE three amendments to the Aviation Advisory Committee bylaws to: 1) change officer elections to the second regularly scheduled meeting of the calendar year, 2) have annual officer terms take effect following the adjournment of the meeting in which they were elected, and 3) establish the following year’s meeting schedule during the last regularly scheduled meeting of the calendar year. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact BACKGROUND: Originally established in the late 1970’s,the County continues to have a highly functioning Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC).As stated in its bylaws,the AAC’s role is to provide advice and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on aviation issues related to the economic viability and security of airports in Contra Costa County.Until early 2023,the AAC’s established bylaws,as amended from time to time by the Board,required the Committee to meet at least once a month, with the ability to hold special meetings more frequently as needed. In an effort to maximize staffing resources,the Director of Airports requested that the Committee consider switching to bi -monthly meetings.Members of the AAC concurred and on January 17,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved the amendment to the AAC bylaws to change the meeting frequency from every month to every other month. Meeting bi-monthly has necessitated amendments to the bylaws to ensure that officer elections, officer term commencements, and the establishment of annual meeting schedules, occur during the months the committee meets. The CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0500,Version:1 attached red-line version of the bylaws reflects the proposed amendments. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Not updating the bylaws will cause inconsistencies in the committee’s meeting schedule and the timing of various events. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 BYLAWS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AVIATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE As Amended January 17February 27, 20243 I. Name The name of the committee is the Contra Costa County Aviation Advisory Committee (the “AAC"). II. Purposes and Objectives A. The purpose of the AAC is to provide advice and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County on aviation issues that (i) are related to the economic viability and security of airports in Contra Costa County, and (ii) affect the general welfare of people living and working near the airports and in the broader community. B. The AAC may conduct public discussions and hear comments on airport and aviation interests relative to the safe and orderly operation of airports in order to formulate the recommendations it makes to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (“Board of Supervisors”). C. The AAC may conduct discussions with local, state, and national aviation interests relative to the safe and orderly operation of airports in order to formulate the recommendations it makes to the Board of Supervisors. D. At the Request of the Director of Airports, the AAC shall provide the Director of Airports a forum within which to discuss policy matters affecting the County’s airports. III. Membership A. All appointments to the AAC must be made by the Board of Supervisors. B. The AAC consists of the following thirteen members: 1. One member nominated by each of the five (5) members of the Board of Supervisors. 2. One member nominated by the City of Concord. 3. One member nominated by the City of Pleasant Hill. 4. One member nominated by the Contra Costa County Airports Business Association. 2 5. One member nominated by the Airport Committee of the Board of Supervisors (the “Airport Committee”) who lives and/or works in the community of Pacheco, which is in the vicinity of Buchanan Field Airport. 6. One member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives and/or works in Brentwood, Byron, Knightsen or Discovery Bay, all of which are in the vicinity of Byron Airport. 7. Three members at large, representing the general community, nominated by the Airport Committee. C. At least one member of the AAC will be appointed by the County or Director of Airports to the ALUC. D. All members of the AAC must reside in Contra Costa County, work in Contra Costa County, or both. E. Scheduled and unscheduled vacancies are to be filled in accordance with the procedures set forth in the County’s Resolution No. 2002/377. F. AAC members must adhere to the Policy for Board Appointees established by the Board of Supervisors under Resolution 2002/376, which addresses, among other things, the need for AAC members to avoid conflicts of interest. AAC members shall disclose all potential conflicts of interest to the AAC. G. All newly-appointed and reappointed AAC members must complete County training regarding the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County’s Better Government Ordinance, and complete the County’s Ethics Orientation within 90 days of the appointment. If a member fails to complete all three programs within the 90-day time period, the Chair of the AAC will report such failure to Airport Committee. The Airport Committee will determine whether recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the offending member’s appointment be rescinded. IV. Term A. The term of each member’s appointment is three years. An appointment made to fill an unscheduled vacancy will be for the term remaining for the vacated seat. Terms are staggered. B. If the appointing jurisdiction has not reappointed a member on or before the specified expiration date, then that member may hold over on a month-to-month basis for a period not to exceed 60 days. V. Attendance Requirements A. Regular attendance at meetings of the AAC is required. Failure to attend three consecutive scheduled meetings will be considered grounds for the AAC to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the offending member’s appointment 3 be rescinded by the Board of Supervisors. A significant pattern of absences may also be considered grounds for recommending rescission of a member’s appointment. B. The Chairperson of the AAC may, in his or her discretion, excuse AAC members from attending one or more meetings of the AAC. C. The Chairperson will notify any member at risk of having his or her appointment rescinded before recommending rescission to the Board of Supervisors. D. Rescission of an appointment to the AAC may only be effected by an action of the Board of Supervisors. VI. Quorum A. Seven members of the AAC constitute a quorum. All AAC’s actions, unless otherwise provided for, require a majority vote by a quorum. VII. Officers A. The AAC shall elect its own Chairperson, Vice-Chair, and Secretary. B. Officers are elected annually at the AAC’s second regularly scheduled meeting in Aprilof the calendar year. Members may serve a maximum number of three consecutive years in any one office. C. Annual officer terms begin on May 1take effect following at the conclusion adjournment of the meeting in which they were elected. VIII. Scheduled Meetings A. Meetings will be held at Buchanan Field Airport or Byron Airport as appropriate. Regular meetings are to be held at least once every other month on a schedule that is established annually by the AAC in May of eachduring the last regularly scheduled meeting of the calendar year. Special meetings may be held more frequently as needed. B. Regular or Special meetings may be scheduled, rescheduled, cancelled, or relocated, provided that all scheduling activities are consistent with the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County’s Better Government Ordinance. C. Agendas and minutes of all meetings are to be published, distributed, and posted in accordance with the requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County's Better Government Ordinance. D. The Director of Airports will establish and maintain a file of the records of the AAC and provide or arrange for appropriate levels of staff support. 4 IX. Amendments to Bylaws Proposed amendments to these Bylaws may only be introduced at a regularly scheduled meeting of the AAC. The AAC’s adoption of any proposed amendments to the bylaws must be approved by a majority of the membership present at the regularly scheduled meeting that follows the introduction of the proposed amendments. All amendments to the bylaws are subject to approval of the Board of Supervisors and will be effective once approved by the Board of Supervisors. 1 BYLAWS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AVIATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE As Amended February 27, 2024 I. Name The name of the committee is the Contra Costa County Aviation Advisory Committee (the “AAC"). II. Purposes and Objectives A. The purpose of the AAC is to provide advice and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County on aviation issues that (i) are related to the economic viability and security of airports in Contra Costa County, and (ii) affect the general welfare of people living and working near the airports and in the broader community. B. The AAC may conduct public discussions and hear comments on airport and aviation interests relative to the safe and orderly operation of airports in order to formulate the recommendations it makes to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (“Board of Supervisors”). C. The AAC may conduct discussions with local, state, and national aviation interests relative to the safe and orderly operation of airports in order to formulate the recommendations it makes to the Board of Supervisors. D. At the Request of the Director of Airports, the AAC shall provide the Director of Airports a forum within which to discuss policy matters affecting the County’s airports. III. Membership A. All appointments to the AAC must be made by the Board of Supervisors. B. The AAC consists of the following thirteen members: 1. One member nominated by each of the five (5) members of the Board of Supervisors. 2. One member nominated by the City of Concord. 3. One member nominated by the City of Pleasant Hill. 4. One member nominated by the Contra Costa County Airports Business Association. 2 5. One member nominated by the Airport Committee of the Board of Supervisors (the “Airport Committee”) who lives and/or works in the community of Pacheco, which is in the vicinity of Buchanan Field Airport. 6. One member nominated by the Airport Committee who lives and/or works in Brentwood, Byron, Knightsen or Discovery Bay, all of which are in the vicinity of Byron Airport. 7. Three members at large, representing the general community, nominated by the Airport Committee. C. At least one member of the AAC will be appointed by the County or Director of Airports to the ALUC. D. All members of the AAC must reside in Contra Costa County, work in Contra Costa County, or both. E. Scheduled and unscheduled vacancies are to be filled in accordance with the procedures set forth in the County’s Resolution No. 2002/377. F. AAC members must adhere to the Policy for Board Appointees established by the Board of Supervisors under Resolution 2002/376, which addresses, among other things, the need for AAC members to avoid conflicts of interest. AAC members shall disclose all potential conflicts of interest to the AAC. G. All newly-appointed and reappointed AAC members must complete County training regarding the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County’s Better Government Ordinance, and complete the County’s Ethics Orientation within 90 days of the appointment. If a member fails to complete all three programs within the 90-day time period, the Chair of the AAC will report such failure to Airport Committee. The Airport Committee will determine whether recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the offending member’s appointment be rescinded. IV. Term A. The term of each member’s appointment is three years. An appointment made to fill an unscheduled vacancy will be for the term remaining for the vacated seat. Terms are staggered. B. If the appointing jurisdiction has not reappointed a member on or before the specified expiration date, then that member may hold over on a month-to-month basis for a period not to exceed 60 days. V. Attendance Requirements A. Regular attendance at meetings of the AAC is required. Failure to attend three consecutive scheduled meetings will be considered grounds for the AAC to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the offending member’s appointment 3 be rescinded by the Board of Supervisors. A significant pattern of absences may also be considered grounds for recommending rescission of a member’s appointment. B. The Chairperson of the AAC may, in his or her discretion, excuse AAC members from attending one or more meetings of the AAC. C. The Chairperson will notify any member at risk of having his or her appointment rescinded before recommending rescission to the Board of Supervisors. D. Rescission of an appointment to the AAC may only be effected by an action of the Board of Supervisors. VI. Quorum A. Seven members of the AAC constitute a quorum. All AAC’s actions, unless otherwise provided for, require a majority vote by a quorum. VII. Officers A. The AAC shall elect its own Chairperson, Vice-Chair, and Secretary. B. Officers are elected annually at the AAC’s second regularly scheduled meeting of the calendar year. Members may serve a maximum number of three consecutive years in any one office. C. Annual officer terms take effect following the adjournment of the meeting in which they were elected. VIII. Scheduled Meetings A. Meetings will be held at Buchanan Field Airport or Byron Airport as appropriate. Regular meetings are to be held at least once every other month on a schedule that is established annually by the AAC during the last regularly scheduled meeting of the calendar year. Special meetings may be held more frequently as needed. B. Regular or Special meetings may be scheduled, rescheduled, cancelled, or relocated, provided that all scheduling activities are consistent with the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County’s Better Government Ordinance. C. Agendas and minutes of all meetings are to be published, distributed, and posted in accordance with the requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act and the County's Better Government Ordinance. D. The Director of Airports will establish and maintain a file of the records of the AAC and provide or arrange for appropriate levels of staff support. 4 IX. Amendments to Bylaws Proposed amendments to these Bylaws may only be introduced at a regularly scheduled meeting of the AAC. The AAC’s adoption of any proposed amendments to the bylaws must be approved by a majority of the membership present at the regularly scheduled meeting that follows the introduction of the proposed amendments. All amendments to the bylaws are subject to approval of the Board of Supervisors and will be effective once approved by the Board of Supervisors. 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-64 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-64 recognizing Carl J. Roner, for his 20 years of service to Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Public Works Director. Attachments:1. Resolution 2024-64.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Recognizing Carl J. Roner for his 20 years of service to Contra Costa County. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution recognizing Carl J.Roner,for his 20 years of service to Contra Costa County,as recommended by the Public Works Director. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-64,Version:1 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California IN THE MATTER OF Recognizing Carl J. Roner for his 20 years of service to Contra Costa County. WHEREAS,Carl J.Roner began his career with Contra Costa County at the Public Works Department in 2004 as an Associate Civil Engineer in the Design Division; and WHEREAS in 2007 Carl rotated to the Flood Control Division and in 2015 to the Maintenance Division; and WHEREAS in 2010 Carl received a J.Michael Walford Award Nomination for his work on the Pinole CreekDemonstration Project; and WHEREAS in 2012 Carl received the 1st Quarter Award of Excellence for his grant writing skills for the UpperSand Creek Basin Project; and WHEREAS in February 2013 Carl received a commendation for securing the State of California Proposition1E grand for the Walnut Creek and Grayson Creek Levee Rehabilitation Project; and WHEREAS in April 2013 Carl received a commendation for his work in establishing the Flood ControlDistrictNurserywhereheharvestedseedsandcuttingsattheUpperSandCreekDetentionBasinandplantedthem in the Public Works Department open area; and WHEREAS in May 2013 Carl received a commendation for being a good ambassador of Flood Control andWaterConservationDistrictandPublicWorksDepartmentandmakingapresentationtotheFriendsofAlhambra Creek presenting a softer, greener, side of the District and Department; and WHEREAS in 2014 Carl received the 2013 J.Michael Walford Award for Individual Achievement as the Project Manager for the Upper Sand Creek Basin Project and for starting the Volunteer Restoration Nursery; CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-64,Version:1 and WHEREAS in 2017 Carl promoted to Senior Civil Engineer and rotated to the Special Districts Unit of theEngineering Division; and WHEREAS Carl supports the management of the Iron Horse Corridor (IHC),formerly a Southern PacificRailroadroute.Carl has served as the IHC Program Manager,which included being a staff to the IHC AdvisoryCommitteeandworkingwithadjacentpropertyownersandutilityagenciestohelpensurethetrailissafeforallusers; and WHEREAS in 2019 Carl received a J.Michael Walford Award Nomination for managing the IHC andproviding outstanding customer service; and WHEREAS in 2022 Carl received his certificate of completion for the American Public Works Association of Northern California Public Works Institute; and WHEREAS Carl is a backpacker enthusiast, a world traveler, and dedicated to public service; and NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors does hereby recognize and honor Carl J. Roner for his 20 years of dedicated service to Control Costa County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-65 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/22/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-65 proclaiming February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence Awareness Month, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director in partnership with STAND! for Families Free of Violence. Attachments:1. Resolution 2024-65.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Proclaim February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence Awareness Month ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT a resolution declaring February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence Awareness Month as recommended by the Employment & Human Services Director in partnership with STAND! For Families Free of Violence. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: February is National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Month, an issue that impacts all community members - teens, parents, teachers, friends, relatives, and more. Contra Costa Alliance to End Abuse, STAND!, and other community partners are raising awareness about teen dating violence and promoting safe, healthy relationships. This resolution seeks to encourage schools, community groups, families, and youth to hold and participate in programs and activities that raise awareness about the dynamics of teen dating violence and empower teens to develop healthy and safe relationships throughout their lives. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-65,Version:1 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California IN THE MATTER OF proclaiming February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence and Prevention Month WHEREAS,teen dating violence is a serious public health issue defined as physical,psychological or sexual abuse;harassment;or stalking of any person ages 12 to 18 in a past or present romantic or consensual relationship; and WHEREAS,the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that,in 2019,1 in 12 U.S.high school students reported experiencing physical dating violence and the same number reported experiencing sexual dating violence.According to the U.S.Department of Justice’s 2022 Teen Dating Violence Report,19%of U.S. teens experience sexual or physical dating violence and about half face stalking or harassment and as many as 65% report being psychologically abused; and WHEREAS,survivors of teen dating violence have increased risk for truancy,dropout,teen pregnancy,suicide, having eating disorders,and engaging in other harmful behaviors such as use of alcohol,tobacco,and other drugs , and WHEREAS,teen dating violence is linked to bullying,sexual harassment,sexual violence,physical violence, and other forms of violence against peers.High school youth survivors are at higher risk for victimization during college,while teen perpetrators of dating violence are more likely to abuse their intimate partners as adults; and WHEREAS,the Contra Costa Alliance to End Abuse recognizes that teen dating violence is preventable through efforts that foster caring relationships with adults and peers and provide meaningful opportunities for CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-65,Version:1 through efforts that foster caring relationships with adults and peers and provide meaningful opportunities for youth to participate and contribute.The Alliance supports prevention programs,such as STAND!For Families Free of Violence’s Youth Education Supportive Services (YESS),that help ensure a safe learning environment for all youth,promote resilience and positive youth development,and protect youth from abuse in relationships; and WHEREAS,in the 2022-23 school year,STAND!’s YESS program educated 1,132 middle and high school youth about teen dating violence;taught an estimated 60 school personnel,service providers and parents,about the scope and causes of dating violence,including bullying and sexual harassment,and about healthy dating relationships;held sixteen 10-week long gender-based support groups at five high schools;and provided secondary prevention activities to 200 youth experiencing or at risk for teen dating violence; and WHEREAS,STAND!’s Youth Against Violence team,comprised of teen leaders from several high schools, created “Abuse Ain’t Attractive,”a public service announcement,to stop the glamorization of teen dating violence in the media, reaching an estimated 121,000 movie-goers in Contra Costa County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:that Contra Costa County does hereby proclaim the month of February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Month and encourages schools, community groups, families, and youth to hold and participate in programs and activities that raise awareness about the dynamics of teen dating violence and empower teens to develop healthy and safe relationships throughout their lives. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-66 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/29/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-66 recognizing Jim Pinckney for his 35 Years of Service on the Board of Trustees of The Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen. Attachments:1. Resolution 2024-66.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Report Title: Resolution Recognizing Jim Pinckney for 35 Years of Service to the CC Mosquito & Vector Control District ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval of Resolution recognizing Jim Pinckney, for 35 Years of Service on the Board of Trustees of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Jim Pinckney has served 35 years on the Board of Trustees for the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: No negative action. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-66,Version:1 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California IN THE MATTER OF recognizing Jim Pinckney, an Alamo resident, for 35 years of service on the Board of Trustees of the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control. WHEREAS,the Board of Trustees of the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District recognizes the vital role of committed leadership and the invaluable contributions made by its trustees in furthering the mission and goals of the District; and WHEREAS,Trustee James Pinckney was appointed by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on December 6, 1988, to represent the County at-large at the Board of Trustees of the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District; and WHEREAS,Trustee Pinckney admirably served the Board of Trustees for 35 years, significantly contributing to the growth and success of the District; and WHEREAS,Trustee Pinckney has dedicated multiple years as a member of the Advance Planning, Audit, Budget, Personnel, and Executive Committees, and has served multiple years as Chair of the Audit, Budget, and Executive Committees; and WHEREAS, Trustee Pinckney consistently demonstrated his professionalism, integrity, and leadership and has been an essential asset to the Board of Trustees, serving as Board Vice President in 2013 and as Board President in 2014. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors appreciates and thanks Jim Pinckney for his dedication and involvement with the Board of Trustees of the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control and extends their best wishes for his continued success in all future endeavors. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-66,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-67 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-67 honoring Irma Anderson for her Legacy of Leadership and Service to Richmond and Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. Attachments:1. Resolution 2024-67.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Report Title:Honoring Irma Anderson for Her Legacy of Leadership and Service in Richmond and Contra Costa County. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: Pass resolution honoring the late Irma Anderson for her Legacy of Leadership and Service in Richmond and Contra Costa County. FISCAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: See Resolution. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: N/A The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California IN THE MATTER OF HONORING IRMA ANDERSON FOR HER LEGACY OF LEADERSHIP AND CIVIC CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE RICHMOND AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITIES WHEREAS,Irma Anderson, born and raised in Boston, Massachusetts, went on to become the second African American student to graduate from Cornell School of Nursing; CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-67,Version:1 WHEREAS,Irma came to Richmond, CA in 1959 with her husband, Rev. Booker T. Anderson Jr. who would himself serve as a Mayor, City Councilmember, and Pastor of Easter Hill United Methodist Church; WHEREAS,Mr. and Mrs. Anderson had two sons, Ahmad and Wilbert, whom Irma was very proud of; WHEREAS, Irma worked as a Public Health Nurse and top administrator for the Contra Costa County Health Department and earned her Master’s Degree from UC Berkeley School of Public Health; WHEREAS, Irma was the first African-American Director of Public Health Nursing in Contra Costa; WHEREAS, after retiring as Contra Costa’s Director of Public Health Nursing in 1992, Irma was elected to the Richmond City Council with the highest number of votes ever in the history of council elections, becoming the first African-American woman to serve on the City Council; WHEREAS, Irma, after two successful terms on the City Council, was elected Mayor of Richmond, becoming the first and currently only African-American woman elected Mayor of Richmond; WHEREAS, during her tenure as Mayor, Irma helped advance a range of positive improvements in the City of Richmond, including the creation of hundreds of new businesses and affordable housing units, passing a balanced budget, creating the Office of Violence Prevention, expanding after-school programs, garnering millions of dollars from the state which culminated in Richmond Ferry Service, helped establish a culture in which violence is addressed through holistic public health efforts rather than solely through law enforcement, served on Bay Area regional commissions on transportation, housing, health and public safety; and more. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:that Contra Costa County recognizes and honors Irma Anderson for her decades of community service to advance equity, health, affordable housing, and quality of life in Richmond and Contra Costa County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-68 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-68 declaring February 29, 2024 Rare Disease Day in Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia. Attachments:1. Resolution 2024-68.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Report Title:Declare February 29, 2024 Rare Disease Day in Contra Costa County ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: Declare February 29, 2024 Rare Disease Day in Contra Costa County FISCAL IMPACT: NA BACKGROUND: See Resolution CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: NA CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-68,Version:1 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California IN THE MATTER OF Declaring February 29, 2024 Rare Disease Day in Contra Costa County WHEREAS,there are nearly 7,000 diseases and conditions considered rare (each affecting fewer than 200,000 Americans) in the United States, according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH); Whereas,while each of these diseases may affect small numbers of people, rare diseases as a group affect almost 30 million Americans; Whereas,many rare diseases are serious and debilitating conditions that have a significant impact on the lives of those affected; Whereas,while more than 450 drugs and biologics have been approved for the treatment of rare diseases according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), millions of Americans still have rare diseases for which there is no approved treatment; Whereas,individuals and families affected by rare diseases often experience problems such as diagnosis delay, difficulty finding a medical expert, and lack of access to treatments or ancillary services; Whereas,while the public is familiar with some rare diseases such as “Lou Gehrig’s disease” and sympathetic to those affected, many patients and families affected by less widely known rare diseases like Kennedy's Disease, bear a large share of the burden of funding research and raising public awareness to support the search for treatments; Whereas,thousands of residents of Contra Costa County are among those affected by rare diseases since nearly one in 10 Americans have rare diseases; Whereas,the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD) is organizing a nationwide observance of Rare Disease Day on February 29, 2024; Whereas,thousands of patients and caregivers, medical professionals, researchers, companies developing orphan products to treat people with rare diseases, and others in the city of Richmond, will participate in that CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-68,Version:1 observance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:that the last day of February 2024, will be observed as Rare Disease Day in the County of Contra Costa. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0501 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/26/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective January 1, 2024, with Netfile, Inc., to extend the term through March 31, 2027 and increase the payment limit by $175,000 to a new payment limit of $350,000 to provide electronic filing services for California Fair Political Practice Commission (FPPC) Statements of Economic Interest (Form 700) and FPPC Campaign Finance Disclosures, and AB 1234 ethics training, certification, and tracking thereof. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Kristin Connelly, Clerk-Recorder Report Title:Contract Amendment with Netfile, Inc., to Provide E-Filing Services ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract amendment, effective January 1, 2024, with Netfile, Inc., to extend the term through March 31, 2027 and increase the payment limit by $175,000 to a new payment limit of $350,000 to provide electronic filing services for California Fair Political Practice Commission (FPPC) Statements of Economic Interest (Form 700) and FPPC Campaign Finance Disclosures, and AB1234 ethics training, certification, and tracking thereof. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Fund. The costs of this contract are shared by the Clerk of the Board and the Clerk-Recorder Elections Division and are within the departments’ operating budgets. BACKGROUND: Certain elected and appointed County and Special District officials are required to file annual Statements of Economic Interest with the Clerk of the Board or with the Elections Division of the Clerk-Recorder's Office. Candidates for elective office and committees supporting or opposing ballot measures are required by the FPPC to file Campaign Finance Disclosure Reports with the Elections Division of the Clerk-Recorder's Office. These reports are required to be made public. Services provided by NetFile permit these types of reports to be submitted electronically and will make them publicly available online. In addition, County Ordinance No. 2016 -05 requires the Campaign Finance Disclosure Reports to be filed electronically. NetFile provides this capability and makes the information available online in a redacted form. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0501,Version:1 California Assembly Bill 1234 requires elected officials and compensated board members to receive training on public service ethics laws and principles every two years. This amendment also incorporates Netfile’s ethics training services, to enable candidates to take FPPC ethics training as required and provide means of tracking certification of completed ethics training. The contract includes a Special Condition limiting the Contractor’s maximum liability to the County to the total amount of fees paid by the County under this agreement in the twelve months preceding the date on which the claim accrued. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If unapproved, services for offering FPPC ethics trainings would not be incorporated into the agreement, which would require County to manually track completion or renewed certifications of ethics trainings as required by AB1234. Additionally, the Clerk of the Board and Clerk-Recorder Department’s would be unable to provide the reports online beyond the agreement’s original term and would only receive or disclose these reports in a hard copy format. Campaign Finance Disclosure documents would not be able to be filed electronically, as required by County Ordinance 2016-05. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0502 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract with the Lions Center for the Visually Impaired in the amount of $150 to rent its Pittsburg facility for use as a polling site for the March 5, 2024 Primary Election. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Kristin Connelly, Clerk-Recorder Report Title:Agreement for Polling Site in the City of Pittsburg for March 5, 2024 Primary Election ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract with the Lions Center for the Visually Impaired in the amount of $150 to rent its Pittsburg facility for use as a polling site for the March 5, 2024 Primary Election. FISCAL IMPACT: $150 from the General Fund. BACKGROUND: The Elections Division of the Clerk-Recorder’s office will provide 147 polling places throughout the County for the March 5, 2024 Presidential Primary Election. Sites that will be utilized include the Lions Center for the Visually Impaired in the City of Pittsburg. The Facility Rental Application and Use Agreement for this site contains an indemnification and hold harmless provision, whereby the County agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Lions Center for the Visually Impaired for use of this site as a voting location. For election day voting, as well as set up and take down of voting equipment, the agreement provides the County with use of the Lions Center for the Visually Impaired on March 5, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Elections Office will not be able to use this site as a voting location. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0502,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0503 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Secretary of State to pay the County an amount not to exceed $85,077 to serve voters with disabilities and to increase accessibility under the Help America Vote Act for the period of January 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (100% Federal, no County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Kristin Connelly, Clerk-Recorder Report Title:Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Polling Place Accessibility Grant Program with the California Secretary of State ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Clerk-Recorder, or designee, to execute a contract with the California Secretary of State to pay the County an amount not to exceed $85,077 to serve voters with disabilities and to increase accessibility under the Help America Vote Act for the period of January 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Federal funds. No County matching funds are required. BACKGROUND: The contract will secure the use of funding offered by the Secretary of State for the purpose of improvement of the administration of elections to serve voters with disabilities and other specific needs. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will lose this funding with an approved contract with the California Secretary of State. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0503,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0504 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:11/8/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute legal documents to provide a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) loan of $994,807 and a HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) loan of $1,000,000 to Chesley Avenue, L.P., a nonprofit limited partnership, to rehabilitate the Chesley Mutual Housing affordable apartment project located at 802 Chesley Avenue in the City of Richmond. (100% Federal) Attachments:1. Chesley Mutual County Regulatory Agreement (2023), 2. Chesley Mutual Housing County Loan Deed of Trust (2023), 3. Chesley Mutual Housing HOME and CDBG Loan Promissory Note (2023), 4. Chesley Mutual Housing HOME and CDBG Regulatory Agreement (2023), 5. Chesley Mutual Housing HOMEand CDBG Loan Agreement (2023), 6. Chesley Mutual Housing Intercreditor Agreement (with Richmond) (2023), 7. Chesley Mutual Termination and Release of Regulatory Agreemen, 8. Chesley Request for Notice Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Approval of $994,807 CDBG and $1,000,000 HOME Loan and Related Documents for Chesley Mutual Housing Renovation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute legal documents to provide a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) loan of $994,807 and a HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) loan of $1,000,000 to Chesley Avenue, L.P., a nonprofit limited partnership, to rehabilitate the Chesley Mutual Housing affordable apartment project located at 802 Chesley Avenue in Richmond. FISCAL IMPACT: No General Fund impact. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds are provided to the County on a formula allocation basis through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). CDBG CFDA #14.218, HOME CFDA #14.239. BACKGROUND: On May 11, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved an allocation of $994,807 in CDBG funds and $1,000,000 in HOME funds to Chesley Avenue, L.P., a limited partnership with Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond acting as the managing general partner. The funds will be CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0504,Version:1 provided as a loan for the rehabilitation of Chesley Mutual Housing, a 19-year-old affordable housing development located at 802 Chesley Avenue in Richmond. The scope of work will include interior and exterior improvements, including but not limited to new roofing shingles and flashing, siding, and wall repair; replacement of lighting and installation of new play area surface and equipment; plumbing upgrades including new water heaters, replacement of bathroom hardware (shower heads and valves) and stall repair; Heating/Ventilation/Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment repairs/improvements; and upgrading fire alarm and carbon monoxide detection system. The County will provide the funds in the form of a 55-year loan. The loan will have a three percent simple annual interest rate over the 55-year term, and there may be annual loan payments if the project has a surplus cash flow. Otherwise, the loan is deferred for the 55-year term. Coterminous with the loan term, the County will enter into a Regulatory Agreement with Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership to restrict 29 of the units at the following levels of affordability: ·2 units at 30% Area Median Income (AMI) ·7 units at 40% AMI ·20 units at 50% AMI The CDBG/HOME Loan Agreement, the Promissory Note, Deed of Trust, Intercreditor Agreement, Regulatory Agreement, and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants are attached in their substantially final form and will be executed in a form approved by County Counsel. The County’s Loan will be subordinate to the existing debt on the project, and the County may be requested to sign estoppel agreements to that effect. This action of the Board includes authorization of the DCD Director, or designee, to execute estoppel and subordination agreements consistent with the subordination terms contained in the Development Loan Agreement. Additional non-County financing for the rehabilitation includes a loan from Housing Trust Silicon Valley and the project’s reserves. The recommended action includes authorization for the Director of the Department of Conservation and Development, or designee, to execute all necessary legal documents and to take any and all actions necessary to implement the activities authorized under the Loan Documents, including execution of loan amendments or modifications for the purposes of agreeing to reasonable extensions of time deadlines. Due to the high construction costs and limited revenue from the restricted rents, the total amount of financing provided to the project will likely exceed the value of the completed project. Even though the proposed equity investment from low-income housing tax credits is substantial compared to the amount of long-term debt, the partnership agreement will have numerous safeguards for the investor’s equity. These safeguards essentially subordinate the County’s debt to the investor’s equity. Therefore, the County CDBG and HOME funds may not be fully secured through the value of the property. However, the CDBG and HOME program funds are granted, not loaned, to the County, so the County general fund will not have any exposure due to this loan. The County structures its CDBG and HOME investments as loans rather than grants in order to maintain involvement in the financial team in the event the project experiences any serious issues over the 55-year term. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): CDBG and HOME projects are subject to NEPA and 24 CFR Part 58 review. The NEPA review for this project has been completed. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval and execution of the legal documents, the rehabilitation of Chesley Mutual Housing will not be completed, and the property will continue to suffer from deferred maintenance. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 863\104\3617621.2 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Assistant Deputy Director No fee for recording pursuant to Government Code Section 27383 and 27388.1 __________________________________________________________________________ COUNTY REGULATORY AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS (Chesley Mutual Housing) This County Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants (the "County Regulatory Agreement") is dated February 15, 2024, and is between the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), and Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("Borrower"). RECITALS A. Defined terms used but not defined in these recitals are as defined in Article 1 of this County Regulatory Agreement. B. The County has received Home Investment Partnerships Act ("HOME") funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") pursuant to the Cranston-Gonzales National Housing Act of 1990 ("HOME Funds"). The HOME Funds must be used by the County in accordance with 24 C.F.R. Part 92. C. The County has received Community Development Block Grant Program ("CDBG") funds from HUD under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 USC 5301, et seq.), as amended ("CDBG Funds"). The CDBG Funds must be used by the County in accordance with 24 C.F.R. Part 570. D. Borrower is the owner of the real property commonly known as 802 Chesley Avenue, located in the County of Contra Costa, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit A (the "Property"). Borrower intends to rehabilitate the thirty (30) multifamily housing units currently existing on the Property, of which twenty-nine (29) are for rental to extremely low and very low income households, and one (1) is a manager's unit (the "Development"). The Development, as well as all landscaping, roads and parking spaces on the Property and any additional improvements on the Property, are the "Improvements". 2 863\104\3617621.2 E. Pursuant to a Development Loan Agreement of even date herewith between the County and Borrower (the "Loan Agreement"), the County is lending Borrower One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) of HOME Funds and Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($994,807) of CDBG Funds for a total loan of One Million Nine Hundred Ninety- Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,994,807) (the "County Loan") to assist in the rehabilitation of the Development. F. In addition to this County Regulatory Agreement and the Loan Agreement, the County Loan is evidenced and secured by the following documents: (i) a deed of trust with assignment of rents, security agreement, and fixture filing of even date herewith, among Borrower, as trustor, Old Republic Title Company, as trustee, and the County, as beneficiary; (ii) an intercreditor agreement of even date herewith among the City, the County, and Borrower; (iii) a promissory note executed by Borrower of even date herewith in the amount of the County Loan; and (iv) the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, executed by Borrower of even date herewith, (collectively, the "Loan Documents"). The Loan Documents are described in more detail in the Loan Agreement. G. The County has the authority to lend the County Loan to Borrower pursuant to Government Code Section 26227, which authorizes counties to spend county funds for programs that will further a county's public purposes. In addition, the County has the authority to loan (i) the HOME Funds pursuant to 24 C.F.R. 92.205, and (ii) the CBDG Funds pursuant to 24 C.F.R. 570.202. H. The County has agreed to make the County Loan on the condition that Borrower maintain and operate the Development in accordance with restrictions set forth in this County Regulatory Agreement and the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and in the related documents evidencing the County Loan. Twenty-nine (29) of the Units are restricted by the County pursuant to this County Regulatory Agreement, which are the same twenty-nine (29) Units restricted by the County pursuant to the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. I. As it applies to the County-Assisted Units this County Regulatory Agreement will be in effect for the Term. The HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement as it applies to the HOME- Assisted Units will be in effect for the HOME Term. Pursuant to Section 6.16 below, compliance with the terms of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will be deemed compliance with this County Regulatory Agreement during the HOME Term. J. In consideration of receipt of the County Loan at an interest rate substantially below the market rate, Borrower agrees to observe all the terms and conditions set forth below. The parties therefore agree as follows: 3 863\104\3617621.2 AGREEMENT ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS 1.1 Definitions. The following terms have the following meanings: (a) "Accessibility Requirements" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.1(e). (b) "Actual Household Size" means the actual number of persons in the applicable household. (c) "Adjusted Income" means with respect to the Tenant of each Unit, the Tenant’s total anticipated annual income as defined in 24 CFR 5.609 and as calculated pursuant to 24 CFR 5.611. (d) "Assumed Household Size" means the household size "adjusted for family size appropriate to the unit" as such term is defined in Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5(h), used to calculate Rent. (e) "CDBG" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (f) "CDBG Funds" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (g) "City" means the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation. (h) "Completion Date" means the date a final certificate of occupancy, or equivalent document is issued by the City to certify that the Development may be legally occupied. (i) "County-Assisted Units" means the twenty-nine (29) Units to be rehabilitated on the Property that are restricted to occupancy by Extremely Low Income Households, Forty Percent Income Households, and Very Low Income Households in compliance with Section 2.1 below. (j) "County Loan" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (k) "County Regulatory Agreement" has the meaning set forth in the first paragraph of this County Regulatory Agreement. (l) "Deed of Trust" means the Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement and Fixture Filing of even date herewith by and among Borrower, as trustor, Old Republic Title Company, as trustee, and the County, as beneficiary, that encumbers the 4 863\104\3617621.2 Property to secure repayment of the County Loan and Borrower's performance of the Loan Documents. (m) "Development" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (n) "Development Regulatory Documents" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.2(a). (o) "Existing Tenants" means the tenants that occupy the Development on the date of the recordation of this County Regulatory Agreement. (p) "Extremely Low Income Household" means a household with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of Median Income, adjusted for Actual Household Size. (q) "Extremely Low Income Rent" means one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of thirty percent (30%) of Median Income, adjusted for Assumed Household Size. (r) "Extremely Low Income Units" means the Units which, pursuant to Section 2.1(a) below, are required to be occupied by Extremely Low Income Households. (s) "Forty Percent Income Household" means a household with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed forty percent (40%) of Median Income, adjusted for Actual Household Size. (t) "Forty-Percent Income Rent" means one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of forty percent (40%) of Median Income, adjusted for Assumed Household Size. (u) "Forty Percent Income Units" means the Units which, pursuant to Section 2.1(b) below, are required to be occupied by Forty Percent Income Households. (v) "HOME" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (w) "HOME Funds" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (x) "HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement" means the Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants of even date herewith, between the County and Borrower evidencing County requirements applicable to the County Loan, to be recorded against the Property concurrently herewith. (y) "HOME Term" means the term of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement which commences as of the date of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and unless sooner terminated pursuant to the terms of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, expires on the twenty-first (21st) anniversary of the Completion Date; provided, however, if a record of the Completion Date cannot be located or established, the HOME Term will expire on the twenty-third (23rd) anniversary of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (z) "HUD" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. 5 863\104\3617621.2 (aa) "Loan Agreement" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (bb) "Loan Documents" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph E of the Recitals. (cc) "Low Income Household" means a Tenant with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed eighty percent (80%) of Median Income, adjusted for Actual Household Size. (dd) "Low Income Rent" means one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of sixty-five percent (65%) of Median Income, adjusted for Assumed Household Size. (ee) "Maintenance Standards" has the meaning set forth in Section 5.6(a). (ff) "Marketing Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.3(a). (gg) "Median Income" means the median gross yearly income, adjusted for Actual Household Size as specified herein, in the County of Contra Costa, California, as published from time to time by HUD. In the event that such income determinations are no longer published, or are not updated for a period of at least eighteen (18) months, the County shall provide Borrower with other income determinations that are reasonably similar with respect to methods of calculation to those previously published by HUD. (hh) "Operating Budget" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.6(a). (ii) "Partnership Agreement" means the agreement between Borrower's general partner and limited partner that governs the operation and organization of Borrower as a California limited partnership. (jj) "Property" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (kk) "Rent" means the total monthly payments by the Tenant of a Unit for the following: use and occupancy of the Unit and land and associated facilities; any separately charged fees or service charges assessed by Borrower which are customarily charged in rental housing and required of all Tenants, other than security deposits; an allowance for the cost of an adequate level of service for utilities paid by the Tenant, including garbage collection, sewer, water, electricity, gas and other heating, cooking and refrigeration fuel, but not telephone service or cable TV; and any other interest, taxes, fees or charges for use of the land or associated facilities and assessed by a public or private entity other than Borrower, and paid by the Tenant. (ll) "Rental Subsidy" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.6(a). (mm) "Subsidy Units" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.6(a). (nn) "Technology Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.3(c). (oo) "Tenant" means the tenant household that occupies a Unit in the Development. 6 863\104\3617621.2 (pp) "Tenant Selection Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.3(b). (qq) "Term" means the term of this County Regulatory Agreement which commences as of the date of this County Regulatory Agreement, and unless sooner terminated pursuant to the terms of this County Regulatory Agreement, expires on the fifty-fifth (55th) anniversary of the Completion Date; provided, however, if a record of the Completion Date cannot be located or established, the Term will expire on the fifty-seventh (57th) anniversary of this County Regulatory Agreement. (rr) "Transfer" has the meaning set forth in Section 6.1. (ss) "Unit(s)" means one (1) or more of the units in the Development. (tt) "Very Low Income Household" means a household with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed fifty percent (50%) of Median Income. (uu) "Very Low Income Units" means the Units which, pursuant to Section 2.1(c) below, are required to be occupied by Very Low Income Households. (vv) "Very Low Income Rent" means one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of fifty percent (50%) of Median Income, adjusted for Assumed Household Size. ARTICLE 2 AFFORDABILITY AND OCCUPANCY COVENANTS 2.1 Occupancy Requirements. (a) Extremely Low Income Units. During the Term Borrower shall cause two (2) Units to be rented to and occupied by or, if vacant, available for occupancy by, Extremely Low Income Households. (b) Forty Percent Income Units. During the Term Borrower shall cause seven (7) Units to be rented to and occupied by or, if vacant, available for occupancy by, Forty Percent Income Households. (c) Very Low Income Units. During the Term Borrower shall cause twenty (20) Units to be rented to and occupied by or, if vacant, available for occupancy by, Very Low Income Households. (d) Intermingling of Units. Borrower shall cause the County-Assisted Units to be intermingled throughout the Development and of comparable quality to all other Units. All Tenants must have equal access to and enjoyment of all common facilities in the Development. The County-Assisted Units must be of the bedroom sizes set forth in the following chart: Extremely Low Income Units Forty Percent Income Units Very Low Income Units 7 863\104\3617621.2 Two Bedroom 1 2 5 Three Bedroom 1 5 15 Total 2 7 20 (e) Disabled Persons Occupancy. (1) Borrower shall cause the Development to be operated at all times in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local disabled persons accessibility requirements including, but not limited to the applicable provisions of: (i) the Unruh Act, (ii) the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, (iii) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (iv) the United States Fair Housing Act, as amended, (v) the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, and (vi) Chapters 11A and 11B of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which relate to disabled persons access (collectively, the "Accessibility Requirements"). (2) Borrower shall indemnify, protect, hold harmless and defend (with counsel reasonably satisfactory to the County) the County, and its board members, officers and employees, from all suits, actions, claims, causes of action, costs, demands, judgments and liens arising out of Borrower's failure to comply with the Accessibility Requirements. This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this County Regulatory Agreement, repayment of the County Loan and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. (f) Existing Tenants. Borrower shall provide the County a written report of the income and rent amount of all Existing Tenants within thirty (30) days of date of the recordation of this County Regulatory Agreement. Concurrent with providing the report to the County, Borrower shall also provide a proposal regarding designation of Units as Extremely Low Income Units, Forty Percent Income Units, and Very Low Income Units. Borrower shall not implement any rent increases for Existing Tenants upon recordation of this County Regulatory Agreement without the approval of the County. Any Rent increase is subject to Section 2.3 below. Any Existing Tenant lawfully residing in the Development as of the date of this Agreement is entitled to remain a resident of the Development even if such Tenant does not meet the income and other eligibility criteria of this Section 2.1. If and when such non-qualifying Existing Tenant voluntarily vacates the Unit, Borrower shall rent such Unit to an Extremely Low Income Household, Forty Percent Income Household, or Very Low Income Household, as necessary to meet the provisions of this Section. 2.2 Allowable Rent. (a) Extremely Low Income Rent. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 below, the Rent paid by Tenants of Extremely Low Income Units may not exceed the Extremely Low Income Rent. 8 863\104\3617621.2 (b) Forty Percent Income Rent. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 below, the Rent paid by Tenants of Forty Percent Income Units may not exceed the Forty Percent Income Rent. (c) Very Low Income Rent. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 below, the Rent paid by Tenants of Very Low Income Units may not exceed the Very Low Income Rent. (d) No Additional Fees. Borrower may not charge any fee, other than Rent, to any Tenant of the County-Assisted Units for any housing or other services provided by Borrower. 2.3 Rent Increases. (a) Rent Amount. The initial Rent for all County-Assisted Units must be approved by the County prior to occupancy. The County will provide Borrower with a schedule of maximum permissible Rents for the County-Assisted Units and the maximum monthly allowances for utilities and services (excluding telephone) annually. (b) Rent Increases. All Rent increases for all County-Assisted Units are subject to County approval. No later than sixty (60) days prior to the proposed implementation of any Rent increase affecting a County Assisted Unit, Borrower shall submit to the County a schedule of any proposed increase in the Rent charged for County-Assisted Units. The Rent for such Units may be increased no more than once annually (i.e. once every 12 months) based upon the annual income certification described in Article 3. The County will disapprove a Rent increase if it violates the schedule of maximum permissible Rents for the County-Assisted Units provided to Borrower by the County, or is greater than a 5% increase over the previous year's Rent, provided that the County may approve a request from Borrower for a rent increase greater than 5%, with a written explanation for the request from Borrower. Borrower shall give Tenants written notice at least thirty (30) days prior to any Rent increase, following completion of the County approval process set forth above. 2.4 Increased Income of Tenants. (a) Increased Income above Extremely Low Income but at or below Forty Percent Income. Subject to Section 2.3 above, if, upon the annual certification of the income of a Tenant of a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the income of the Tenant has increased to above the qualifying limit for an Extremely Low Income Household, but not above the qualifying income for a Forty Percent Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit and the Tenant's Rent will remain at the Extremely Low Income Rent. Borrower shall then rent the next available Unit to an Extremely Low Income Household to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1(a) above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2(a). At the time that Borrower rents the next available unit to an Extremely Low Income Household, the Unit with the over-income Tenant may be re-designated as a Forty Percent Income Unit, or a Very Low Income Unit as applicable, consistent with the current income level of the Tenant, and as necessary to comply with the Unit mix requirements of 9 863\104\3617621.2 Section 2.1 above. At the time of such re-designation, the over-income Tenant's Rent may be increased to match the new income designation, subject to Section 2.3 above. (b) Increased Income above Forty Percent Income but at or below Very Low Income. If, upon the annual certification of the income of a Tenant of a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the income of the Tenant has increased above the qualifying limit for a Forty Percent Income Household, but not above the qualifying income for a Very Low Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit and the Tenant's Rent will remain at the Forty Percent Income Rent. Borrower shall then rent the next available Unit to a Forty Percent Income Household to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1(b) above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2(b). At the time that Borrower rents the next available unit to a Forty Percent Income Household, the Unit with the over-income Tenant may be re-designated as a Very Low Income Unit, and at the time of such re-designation, the over-income Tenant's Rent may be increased to match the new income designation, subject to Section 2.3 above. (c) Increased Income above Very Low Income but at or below Low Income. If, upon the annual certification of the income of a Tenant of a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the income of the Tenant has increased above the qualifying limit for a Very Low Income Household, but not above the qualifying income for a Low Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit and the Tenant's Rent will remain at the Very Low Income Rent. Borrower shall then rent the next available Unit to a Very Low Income Household to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1(c) above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2(c). At the time that Borrower rents the next available unit to a Very Low Income Household, the over-income Tenant's Rent may be increased to the Low Income Rent. (d) Non-Qualifying Household. If, upon the annual certification of the income a Tenant of a County Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the Tenant’s income has increased above the qualifying limit for a Low Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit. Upon the expiration of such Tenant's lease, Borrower may: (1) With 60 days’ advance written notice, increase such Tenant’s Rent to the lesser of (i) one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of the actual Adjusted Income of the Tenant, and (ii) the fair market rent, and (2) Rent the next available Unit to an Extremely Low Income Household, Forty Percent Income Household, or Very Low Income Household as applicable, to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1 above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2, or designate another comparable Unit that is occupied by an Extremely Low Income Household, Forty Percent Income Household, or Very Low Income Household as applicable, as a County Assisted Unit, to meet the requirements of Section 2.1 above. (e) Termination of Occupancy. Upon termination of occupancy of a County Assisted Unit by a Tenant, such Unit will be deemed to be continuously occupied by a household of the same income level as the initial income level of the vacating Tenant, until such unit is 10 863\104\3617621.2 reoccupied, at which time categorization of the Unit will be established based on the occupancy requirements of Section 2.1. 2.5 Loss of Subsidy. (a) It is anticipated that certain Units in the Development (the "Subsidy Units") will receive Project-Based Section 8 or other rental subsidy payments (the "Rental Subsidy") throughout the Term, as reflected in the Approved Development Budget. Notwithstanding Section 2.3(b), if any change in federal law occurs, or any action (or inaction) by Congress or any federal or State agency occurs, which results in a reduction, termination or nonrenewal of the Rental Subsidy through no fault of the Borrower, such that the Rental Subsidy shown on the Approved Development Budget is no longer available, Borrower may increase the Rent on one or more of the County-Assisted Units that overlap with a Subsidy Unit, to the Low Income Rent, subject to the following requirements: (1) At the time Borrower requests an increase in the Rent, Borrower shall provide the County with an operating budget for the Development for the County's approval pursuant to Section 4.4 of the Loan Agreement, showing the impact of the loss or reduction of the Rental Subsidy (the "Operating Budget"); (2) The number of County-Assisted Units subject to the Rent increase and the level of rent increase may not be greater than the amount required to ensure that the Development generates sufficient income to cover its operating costs and debt service as shown on the Operating Budget, and as is necessary to maintain the financial stability of the Development; and (3) Any such Rent increase must be pursuant to a transition plan approved by the County, consistent with remedial measures set forth in California Code of Regulations Title 4, Division 17, Chapter 1, Section 10337(a)(3) or successor regulation applicable to California's Federal and State Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. (b) Borrower shall use good faith efforts to obtain alternative sources of rental subsidies and shall provide the County with annual progress reports on efforts to obtain alternative sources of rental subsidies that would allow the rents on the County-Assisted Units to be reduced back to the Rents set out in Section 2.2. Upon receipt of any alternative rental subsidies, Borrower shall reduce the rents on the County-Assisted Units back to the Rents set out in Section 2.2, to the extent that the alternative rental subsidies provide sufficient income to cover the operating costs and debt service of the Development as shown on the Operating Budget. ARTICLE 3 INCOME CERTIFICATION; REPORTING; RECORDS 3.1 Income Certification. Borrower shall obtain, complete, and maintain on file, within sixty (60) days before expected occupancy and annually thereafter, income certifications from each Tenant renting any of the County-Assisted Units. Borrower shall make a good faith effort to verify the accuracy of the income provided by the applicant or occupying household, as 11 863\104\3617621.2 the case may be, in an income certification. To verify the information, Borrower shall take two or more of the following steps: (i) obtain a pay stub for the most recent pay period; (ii) obtain an income tax return for the most recent tax year; (iii) conduct a credit agency or similar search; (iv) obtain an income verification form from the applicant's current employer; (v) obtain an income verification form from the Social Security Administration and/or the California Department of Social Services if the applicant receives assistance from either of such agencies; or (vi) if the applicant is unemployed and does not have a tax return, obtain another form of independent verification. Where applicable, Borrower shall examine at least two (2) months of relevant source documentation. Copies of Tenant income certifications are to be available to the County upon request. 3.2 Reporting Requirements. (a) Borrower shall submit to the County within one hundred eighty (180) days after the Completion Date, and not later than forty-five (45) days after the close of each calendar year, or such other date as may be requested by the County, a report that includes the following data for each Unit and specifically identifies which Units are County-Assisted Units: (i) Tenant income, (ii) the number of occupants, (iii) the Rent, (iv) the number of bedrooms, and (v) the initial address of each Tenant. To demonstrate continued compliance with Section 2.1 Borrower shall cause each annual report after the initial report to include a record of any subsequent Tenant substitutions and any vacancies in County-Assisted Units that have been filled. (b) Borrower shall submit to the County within forty-five (45) days after receipt of a written request, or such other time agreed to by the County, any other information or completed forms requested by the County in order to comply with reporting requirements of HUD, the State of California, and the County. 3.3 Tenant Records. Borrower shall maintain complete, accurate and current records pertaining to income and household size of Tenants. All Tenant lists, applications and waiting lists relating to the Development are to be at all times: (i) separate and identifiable from any other business of Borrower, (ii) maintained as required by the County, in a reasonable condition for proper audit, and (iii) subject to examination during business hours by representatives of the County. Borrower shall retain copies of all materials obtained or produced with respect to occupancy of the Units for a period of at least five (5) years. The County may examine and make copies of all books, records or other documents of Borrower that pertain to the Development. 3.4 Development Records. (a) Borrower shall keep and maintain at the principal place of business of the Borrower set forth in Section 6.11 below, or elsewhere with the County's written consent, full, complete and appropriate books, records and accounts relating to the Development. Borrower shall cause all books, records and accounts relating to its compliance with the terms, provisions, covenants and conditions of the Loan Documents to be kept and maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied, and to be consistent with requirements of this County Regulatory Agreement. Borrower shall cause all books, records, and accounts to be open to and available for inspection and copying by HUD, the County, its auditors or other authorized representatives at reasonable intervals during normal business hours. 12 863\104\3617621.2 Borrower shall cause copies of all tax returns and other reports that Borrower may be required to furnish to any government agency to be open for inspection by the County at all reasonable times at the place that the books, records and accounts of Borrower are kept. Borrower shall preserve such records (including the records required under the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement) for a period of not less than five (5) years after their creation in compliance with all HUD records and accounting requirements. If any litigation, claim, negotiation, audit exception, monitoring, inspection or other action relating to the use of the County Loan is pending at the end of the record retention period stated herein, then Borrower shall retain the records until such action and all related issues are resolved. Borrower shall cause the records to include all invoices, receipts, and other documents related to expenditures from the County Loan funds. Borrower shall cause records to be accurate and current and in a form that allows the County to comply with the record keeping requirements contained in 24 C.F.R. 92.508 and 24 C.F.R. 570.506. Such records are to include but are not limited to: (i) Records providing a full description of the activities undertaken with the use of the County Loan funds; (ii) Records demonstrating compliance with the maintenance requirements set forth in Section 5.6; (iii) Records documenting compliance with the fair housing, equal opportunity, and affirmative fair marketing requirements; (iv) Financial records; and (v) Records demonstrating compliance with the marketing, tenant selection, affordability, and income requirements. (b) The County shall notify Borrower of any records it deems insufficient. Borrower has fifteen (15) calendar days after the receipt of such a notice to correct any deficiency in the records specified by the County in such notice, or if a period longer than fifteen (15) days is reasonably necessary to correct the deficiency, then Borrower must begin to correct the deficiency within fifteen (15) days and correct the deficiency as soon as reasonably possible. ARTICLE 4 OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT 4.1 Residential Use. Borrower shall operate the Development for residential use only. No part of the Development may be operated as transient housing. 4.2 Compliance with Loan Documents and Regulatory Requirements. (a) Borrower's actions with respect to the Property shall at all times be in full conformity with: (i) all requirements of the Loan Documents; (ii) all requirements imposed on projects assisted with HOME Funds as contained in 42 U.S.C. Section 12701, et seq., 24 C.F.R. Part 92, and other implementing rules and regulations; (iii) all requirements imposed on projects assisted with CDBG Funds as contained in 42 U.S.C. 5301, et seq., 24 C.F.R. Part 570, and other 13 863\104\3617621.2 implementing rules and regulations; and (iv) any other regulatory requirements imposed on the Development including but not limited to regulatory agreements associated with the Low Income Housing Tax Credits provided by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, regulatory agreements associated with financing and subsidies provided by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and rental subsidies provided to the Development (the "Development Regulatory Documents"). (b) Borrower shall promptly notify the County in writing of the existence of any default under any Development Regulatory Documents, and provide the County copies of any such notice of default. 4.3 Marketing Plan; Tenant Selection Plan; Technology Plan. (a) Marketing Plan. (1) No later than six (6) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County for approval its plan for marketing the Development to income-eligible households as required by this County Regulatory Agreement (the "Marketing Plan"). The Marketing Plan must include information on affirmative marketing efforts and compliance with fair housing laws and 24 C.F.R. 92.351(a). (2) Upon receipt of the Marketing Plan, the County will promptly review the Marketing Plan and will approve or disapprove it within fifteen (15) days after receipt. If the Marketing Plan is not approved, the County will give Borrower specific reasons for such disapproval and Borrower shall submit a revised Marketing Plan within fifteen (15) days of notification of the County's disapproval. Borrower shall follow this procedure for resubmission of a revised Marketing Plan until the Marketing Plan is approved by the County. If the Borrower does not submit a revised Marketing Plan that is approved by the County at least three (3) months prior to the date construction of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower will be in default of this County Regulatory Agreement. (b) Tenant Selection Plan. (1) No later than six (6) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County, for its review and approval, Borrower's written tenant selection plan (the "Tenant Selection Plan"). Borrower's Tenant Selection Plan must, at a minimum, meet the requirements for tenant selection set out in 24 C.F.R. 92.253(d), and any modifications thereto. (2) Upon receipt of the Tenant Selection Plan, the County will promptly review the Tenant Selection Plan and will approve or disapprove it within fifteen (15) days after receipt. If the Tenant Selection Plan is not approved, the County will give Borrower specific reasons for such disapproval and Borrower shall submit a revised Tenant Selection Plan within fifteen (15) days of notification of the County's disapproval. Borrower shall follow this procedure for resubmission of a revised Tenant Selection Plan until the Tenant Selection Plan is approved by the County. If the Borrower does not submit a revised Tenant Selection Plan that is approved by the County at least three (3) months prior to the date construction of the 14 863\104\3617621.2 Development is projected to be complete, Borrower will be in default of this County Regulatory Agreement. (c) Technology Plan. (1) No later than six (6) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County, for its review and approval, Borrower's written plan describing the broadband services at the Development (the "Technology Plan"). Broadband means: cables, fiber optics, wiring, or other permanent (integral to the structure) infrastructure, including wireless infrastructure, that is capable of providing access to internet connections in individual housing units. (2) Upon receipt of the Technology Plan, the County will promptly review the Technology Plan and will approve or disapprove it within fifteen (15) days after receipt. If the Technology Plan is not approved, the County will give Borrower specific reasons for such disapproval and Borrower shall submit a revised Technology Plan within fifteen (15) days of notification of the County's disapproval. Borrower shall follow this procedure for resubmission of a revised Technology Plan until the Technology Plan is approved by the County. If the Borrower does not submit a revised Technology Plan that is approved by the County at least three (3) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower will be in default of this County Regulatory Agreement. 4.4 Lease Provisions. (a) No later than four (4) months prior to the date construction of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County for approval Borrower’s proposed form of lease agreement for the County's review and approval. When leasing Units within the Development, Borrower shall use the form of lease approved by the County. The form of lease must comply with all requirements of this County Regulatory Agreement, the other Loan Documents and must, among other matters: (1) provide for termination of the lease for failure to: (i) provide any information required under this County Regulatory Agreement or reasonably requested by Borrower to establish or recertify the Tenant's qualification, or the qualification of the Tenant's household, for occupancy in the Development in accordance with the standards set forth in this County Regulatory Agreement, or (ii) qualify as an Extremely Low Income Household or a Sixty Percent Income Household as appliable, as a result of any material misrepresentation made by such Tenant with respect to the income computation; (2) be for an initial term of not less than one (1) year, unless by mutual agreement between the Tenant and Borrower, and provide for no increase in Rent during such year. After the initial year of tenancy, the lease may be month-to-month by mutual agreement of Borrower and the Tenant. Notwithstanding the above, any rent increases are subject to the requirements of Section 2.3 above; and (3) include a provision that requires a Tenant who is residing in a Unit required to be accessible pursuant to Section 3.9(b) of the Loan Agreement, and who is not in 15 863\104\3617621.2 need of an accessible Unit to move to a non-accessible Unit when a non-accessible Unit becomes available and another Tenant or prospective Tenant is in need of an accessible Unit. (b) During the Term, Borrower shall comply with the Marketing Plan and Tenant Selection Plan approved by the County. (c) Any termination of a lease or refusal to renew a lease for a County Assisted Unit within the Development must be preceded by not less than thirty (30) days written notice to the Tenant by Borrower specifying the grounds for the action. ARTICLE 5 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE 5.1 Management Responsibilities. Borrower is responsible for all management functions with respect to the Development, including without limitation the selection of Tenants, certification and recertification of household size and income, evictions, collection of rents and deposits, maintenance, landscaping, routine and extraordinary repairs, replacement of capital items, and security. The County has no responsibility for management of the Development. Borrower shall retain a professional property management company approved by the County in its reasonable discretion to perform Borrower's management duties hereunder. An on-site property management representative shall reside at the Property. 5.2 Management Agent. Borrower shall cause the Development to be managed by an experienced management agent reasonably acceptable to the County, with a demonstrated ability to operate residential facilities like the Development in a manner that will provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing (the "Management Agent"). The County has approved Community Property Management Corporation as the Management Agent. Borrower shall submit for the County's approval the identity of any proposed subsequent management agent. Borrower shall also submit such additional information about the background, experience and financial condition of any proposed management agent as is reasonably necessary for the County to determine whether the proposed management agent meets the standard for a qualified management agent set forth above. If the proposed management agent meets the standard for a qualified management agent set forth above, the County shall approve the proposed management agent by notifying Borrower in writing. Unless the proposed management agent is disapproved by the County within thirty (30) days, which disapproval is to state with reasonable specificity the basis for disapproval, it shall be deemed approved. 5.3 Periodic Performance Review. The County reserves the right to conduct an annual (or more frequently, if deemed necessary by the County) review of the management practices and financial status of the Development. The purpose of each periodic review will be to enable the County to determine if the Development is being operated and managed in accordance with the requirements and standards of this County Regulatory Agreement. Borrower shall cooperate with the County in such reviews. 5.4 Replacement of Management Agent. If, as a result of a periodic review, the County determines in its reasonable judgment that the Development is not being operated and 16 863\104\3617621.2 managed in accordance with any of the material requirements and standards of this County Regulatory Agreement, the County shall deliver notice to Borrower of its intention to cause replacement of the Management Agent, including the reasons therefor. Within fifteen (15) days after receipt by Borrower of such written notice, the County staff and Borrower shall meet in good faith to consider methods for improving the financial and operating status of the Development, including, without limitation, replacement of the Management Agent. If, after such meeting, County staff recommends in writing the replacement of the Management Agent, Borrower shall promptly dismiss the then-current Management Agent, and shall appoint as the Management Agent a person or entity meeting the standards for a management agent set forth in Section 5.2 above and approved by the County pursuant to Section 5.2 above. Any contract for the operation or management of the Development entered into by Borrower shall provide that the Management Agent may be dismissed and the contract terminated as set forth above. Failure to remove the Management Agent in accordance with the provisions of this Section constitutes a default under this County Regulatory Agreement, and the County may enforce this provision through legal proceedings as specified in Section 6.6 below. 5.5 Approval of Management Policies. Borrower shall submit its written management policies with respect to the Development to the County for its review, and shall amend such policies in any way necessary to ensure that such policies comply with the provisions of this County Regulatory Agreement. 5.6 Property Maintenance. (a) Borrower shall maintain, for the entire Term of this County Regulatory Agreement, all interior and exterior improvements, including landscaping: (i) in decent, safe and sanitary condition, (ii) in good condition and repair, and (iii) free of all health and safety defects. Such maintenance must be in accordance with (i) all applicable laws, rules, ordinances, orders and regulations of all federal, state, county, municipal, and other governmental agencies and bodies having or claiming jurisdiction and all their respective departments, bureaus, and officials; and (ii) any other standards provided by the County (collectively, the "Maintenance Standards"). Borrower shall correct any life-threatening maintenance deficiencies immediately upon notification. (b) At the beginning of each year of the Term, Borrower shall certify to the County that the Development is in compliance with the Maintenance Standards. 5.7 Property Inspections. (a) On-Site Physical Inspections. The County will perform on-site inspections of the Development during the Term to ensure compliance with the Maintenance Standards. The County will perform an on-site inspection within twelve months after completion of construction of the Development and at least once every three (3) years during the Term. If the Development is found to have health and safety violations, the County may perform more frequent inspections. Borrower shall cooperate in such inspections. 17 863\104\3617621.2 (b) Violation of Maintenance Standards. If after an inspection, the County determines that Borrower is in violation of the Maintenance Standards, the County will provide Borrower a written report of the violations. Borrower shall correct the violations set forth in the report provided to Borrower by County. The County will perform a follow-up inspection to verify that the violations have been corrected. If such violations continue for a period of ten (10) days after delivery of the report to Borrower by the County with respect to graffiti, debris, waste material, and general maintenance, or thirty (30) days after delivery of the report to Borrower by the County with respect to landscaping and building improvements, then the County, in addition to whatever other remedy it may have at law or in equity, has the right to enter upon the Property and perform or cause to be performed all such acts and work necessary to cure the violation. Pursuant to such right of entry, the County is permitted (but is not required) to enter upon the Property and to perform all acts and work necessary to protect, maintain, and preserve the improvements and landscaped areas on the Property, and to attach a lien on the Property, or to assess the Property, in the amount of the expenditures arising from such acts and work of protection, maintenance, and preservation by the County and/or costs of such cure, which amount Borrower shall promptly pay to the County upon demand. ARTICLE 6 MISCELLANEOUS 6.1 Transfers. (a) For purposes of this Agreement, "Transfer" means any sale, assignment, or transfer, whether voluntary or involuntary, of: (i) any rights and/or duties under the Loan Documents; and/or (ii) any interest in the Development and/or Borrower, including (but not limited to) a fee simple interest, a joint tenancy interest, a life estate, a partnership interest, a leasehold interest, a security interest, or an interest evidenced by a land contract by which possession of the Development is transferred and Borrower retains title. The term "Transfer" excludes the leasing of any single unit in the Development to an occupant in compliance with this County Regulatory Agreement. The County Director – Department of Conservation and Development is authorized to execute assignment and assumption agreements on behalf of the County to implement any approved Transfer. (b) Except as otherwise permitted in this Section 6.1, no Transfer is permitted without the prior written consent of the County, which the County may withhold in its sole discretion. The County Loan will automatically accelerate and be due in full upon any Transfer made without the prior written consent of the County. (c) The County hereby approves the grant of the security interests in the Development for Approved Financing as such term is defined in Section 1.1(g) of the Loan Agreement. 6.2 Nondiscrimination. (a) All of the Units must be available for occupancy on a continuous basis to members of the general public who are income eligible. Borrower may not give preference to 18 863\104\3617621.2 any particular class or group of persons in renting or selling the Units, except to the extent that the Units are required to be leased to income eligible households or veterans pursuant to this County Regulatory Agreement, the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, or any Development Regulatory Document. Borrower herein covenants by and for Borrower, assigns, and all persons claiming under or through Borrower, that there exist no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), ancestry, age, familial status (except for lawful senior housing in accordance with state and federal law), or disability, in the leasing, subleasing, transferring, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of any unit nor will Borrower or any person claiming under or through Borrower, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use, or occupancy, of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants, or vendees of any unit or in connection with the employment of persons for the construction, operation and management of any unit. (b) Borrower shall accept as Tenants, on the same basis as all other prospective Tenants, persons who are recipients of federal certificates for rent subsidies pursuant to the existing housing program under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act, or its successor. Borrower may not apply selection criteria to Section 8 certificate or voucher holders that is more burdensome than criteria applied to all other prospective Tenants, nor will Borrower apply or permit the application of management policies or lease provisions with respect to the Development which have the effect of precluding occupancy of units by such prospective Tenants. 6.3 Application of Provisions. The provisions of this County Regulatory Agreement apply to the Property for the entire Term even if the County Loan is paid in full prior to the end of the Term. This County Regulatory Agreement binds any successor, heir or assign of Borrower, whether a change in interest occurs voluntarily or involuntarily, by operation of law or otherwise, except as expressly released by the County. The County is making the County Loan on the condition, and in consideration of, this provision, and would not do so otherwise. 6.4 Notice of Expiration of Term. (a) At least six (6) months prior to the expiration of the Term, Borrower shall provide by first-class mail, postage prepaid, a notice to all Tenants containing (i) the anticipated date of the expiration of the Term, (ii) any anticipated increase in Rent upon the expiration of the Term, (iii) a statement that a copy of such notice will be sent to the County, and (iv) a statement that a public hearing may be held by the County on the issue and that the Tenant will receive notice of the hearing at least fifteen (15) days in advance of any such hearing. Borrower shall also file a copy of the above-described notice with the County Assistant Deputy Director, Department of Conservation and Development. (b) In addition to the notice required above, Borrower shall comply with the requirements set forth in California Government Code Sections 65863.10 and 65863.11. Such notice requirements include: (i) a twelve (12) month notice to existing tenants, prospective tenants and Affected Public Agencies (as defined in California Government Code Section 65863.10(a)) prior to the expiration of the Term, (ii) a six (6) month notice requirement to existing tenants, prospective tenants and Affected Public Agencies prior to the expiration of the 19 863\104\3617621.2 Term; (iii) a notice of an offer to purchase the Development to "qualified entities" (as defined in California Government Code Section 65863.11(d)), if the Development is to be sold within five (5) years of the end of the Term; (iv) a notice of right of first refusal within the one hundred eighty (180) day period that qualified entities may purchase the Development. 6.5 Covenants to Run With the Land. The County and Borrower hereby declare their express intent that the covenants and restrictions set forth in this County Regulatory Agreement run with the land, and bind all successors in title to the Property, provided, however, that on the expiration of the Term said covenants and restrictions expire. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereafter executed covering or conveying the Property or any portion thereof, is to be held conclusively to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants and restrictions, regardless of whether such covenants or restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument, unless the County expressly releases such conveyed portion of the Property from the requirements of this County Regulatory Agreement. 6.6 Enforcement by the County. (a) If Borrower fails to perform any obligation under this County Regulatory Agreement, and fails to cure the default within thirty (30) days after the County has notified Borrower in writing of the default, the County may enforce this County Regulatory Agreement by any or all of the following actions, or any other remedy provided by law: (1) Calling the County Loan. The County may declare a default under the Loan Documents, accelerate the indebtedness evidenced by the Loan Documents, and proceed with foreclosure under the Deed of Trust. (2) Action to Compel Performance or for Damages. The County may bring an action at law or in equity to compel Borrower's performance of its obligations under this County Regulatory Agreement, and may seek damages. (3) Remedies Provided Under Loan Documents. The County may exercise any other remedy provided under the Loan Documents. 6.7 Recording and Filing. The County and Borrower shall cause this County Regulatory Agreement, and all amendments and supplements to it, to be recorded in the Official Records of the County of Contra Costa. 6.8 Governing Law. This County Regulatory Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of California. 6.9 Waiver of Requirements. Any of the requirements of this County Regulatory Agreement may be expressly waived by the County in writing, but no waiver by the County of any requirement of this County Regulatory Agreement extends to or affects any other provision of this County Regulatory Agreement, and may not be deemed to do so. 6.10 Amendments. This County Regulatory Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument executed by all the parties hereto or their successors in title that is duly recorded in the official records of the County of Contra Costa. 20 863\104\3617621.2 6.11 Notices. Any notice requirement set forth herein will be deemed to be satisfied three (3) days after mailing of the notice first-class United States certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the appropriate party as follows: County: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Assistant Deputy Director Borrower: Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership c/o Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond 1535-A Fred Jackson Way Richmond, CA 94801 Attn: Executive Director Such addresses may be changed by notice to the other party given in the same manner as provided above. 6.12 Severability. If any provision of this County Regulatory Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining portions of this County Regulatory Agreement will not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 6.13 Multiple Originals; Counterparts. This County Regulatory Agreement may be executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and may be signed in counterparts. 6.14 Revival of Agreement after Foreclosure. In the event there is a foreclosure of the Property, this County Regulatory Agreement will revive according to its original terms if, during the Term, the owner of record before the foreclosure, or deed in lieu of foreclosure, or any entity that includes the former owner or those with whom the former owner has or had family or business ties, obtains an ownership interest in the Development or Property. 6.15 County Regulatory Agreement. The County and Borrower are entering into this County Regulatory Agreement concurrently with the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. This County Regulatory Agreement applies to all the County-Assisted Units including the HOME-Assisted Units. The HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement includes HOME requirements applicable to the use of HOME Funds and will be in effect for the HOME Term. Compliance with the terms of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will be deemed compliance with this County Regulatory Agreement during the HOME Term. In the event of a conflict between the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement and this County Regulatory Agreement during the HOME Term, the terms of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will prevail. [remainder of page intentionally left blank] 21 Signature page County Regulatory Agreement 863\104\3617621.2 WHEREAS, this County Regulatory Agreement has been entered into by the undersigned as of the date first written above. COUNTY: COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California By: __________________ John Kopchik Director, Department of Conservation and Development Approved as to form: THOMAS L. GEIGER County Counsel By: Kathleen Andrus Deputy County Counsel BORROWER: CHESLEY AVENUE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP a California limited partnership By: Chesley Avenue LLC, a California limited liability company, its general partner By: Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, its sole member and manager By: ____________________________ Don Gilmore, Executive Director 863\104\3617621.2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. 863\104\3617621.2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. A-1 863\104\3617621.2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description The land referred to is situated in the County of Contra Costa, City of Richmond, State of California, and is described as follows: Lots 8 through 28, Block 210, Map of Walls Second Addition, filed March 4, 1912, Map Book 6, Page 140, Contra Costa County Records. APN: 561-251-003-1 863\104\3601263.2 1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Assistant Deputy Director No fee for recording pursuant to Government Code Sections 27383 and 27388.1 DEED OF TRUST WITH ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS, SECURITY AGREEMENT, AND FIXTURE FILING (Chesley Mutual Housing) THIS DEED OF TRUST WITH ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS, SECURITY AGREEMENT, AND FIXTURE FILING ("Deed of Trust") is made as of February 15, 2024, by and among Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership with an address of 1535-A Fred Jackson Way, Richmond, CA 94801("Trustor"), Old Republic Title Company, a California corporation ("Trustee"), and the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California with an address of 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 ("Beneficiary"). FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, including the indebtedness herein recited and the trust herein created, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Trustor hereby irrevocably grants, transfers, conveys and assigns to Trustee, IN TRUST, WITH POWER OF SALE, for the benefit and security of Beneficiary, under and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Trustor's fee interest in the property located in the County of Contra Costa, State of California, that is described in the attached Exhibit A, incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"). TOGETHER WITH all interest, estates or other claims, both in law and in equity which Trustor now has or may hereafter acquire in the Property and the rents; TOGETHER WITH all easements, rights-of-way and rights used in connection therewith or as a means of access thereto, including (without limiting the generality of the foregoing) all tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereof and thereto; TOGETHER WITH any and all buildings and improvements of every kind and description now or hereafter erected thereon, and all property of Trustor now or hereafter affixed to or placed upon the Property; TOGETHER WITH all building materials and equipment now or hereafter delivered to said property and intended to be installed therein; 863\104\3601263.2 2 TOGETHER WITH all right, title and interest of Trustor, now owned or hereafter acquired, in and to any land lying within the right-of-way of any street, open or proposed, adjoining the Property, and any and all sidewalks, alleys and strips and areas of land adjacent to or used in connection with the Property; TOGETHER WITH all estate, interest, right, title, other claim or demand, of every nature, in and to such property, including the Property, both in law and in equity, including, but not limited to, all deposits made with or other security given by Trustor to utility companies, the proceeds from any or all of such property, including the Property, claims or demands with respect to the proceeds of insurance in effect with respect thereto, which Trustor now has or may hereafter acquire, any and all awards made for the taking by eminent domain or by any proceeding or purchase in lieu thereof of the whole or any part of such property, including without limitation, any awards resulting from a change of grade of streets and awards for severance damages to the extent Beneficiary has an interest in such awards for taking as provided in Paragraph 4.1 herein; TOGETHER WITH all of Trustor's interest in all articles of personal property or fixtures now or hereafter attached to or used in and about the building or buildings now erected or hereafter to be erected on the Property which are necessary to the complete and comfortable use and occupancy of such building or buildings for the purposes for which they were or are to be erected, including all other goods and chattels and personal property as are ever used or furnished in operating a building, or the activities conducted therein, similar to the one herein described and referred to, and all renewals or replacements thereof or articles in substitution therefor, whether or not the same are, or will be, attached to said building or buildings in any manner; and TOGETHER WITH all of Trustor's interest in all building materials, fixtures, equipment, work in process and other personal property to be incorporated into the Property; all goods, materials, supplies, fixtures, equipment, machinery, furniture and furnishings, signs and other personal property now or hereafter appropriated for use on the Property, whether stored on the Property or elsewhere, and used or to be used in connection with the Property; all rents, issues and profits, and all inventory, accounts, accounts receivable, contract rights, general intangibles, chattel paper, instruments, documents, notes drafts, letters of credit, insurance policies, insurance and condemnation awards and proceeds, trade names, trademarks and service marks arising from or related to the Property and any business conducted thereon by Trustor; all replacements, additions, accessions and proceeds; and all books, records and files relating to any of the foregoing. All of the foregoing, together with the Property, is herein referred to as the "Security." To have and to hold the Security together with acquittances to the Trustee, its successors and assigns forever. FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECURING THE FOLLOWING OBLIGATIONS (together, the "Secured Obligations"): A. Payment to Beneficiary of all sums at any time owing under or in connection with (i) the Note (defined in Section 1.6 below) until paid in full or cancelled, and (ii) any other amounts owing under the Loan Documents (defined in Section 1.5 below). Principal and other 863\104\3601263.2 3 payments are due and payable as provided in the Note or other Loan Documents, as applicable. The Note and all its terms are incorporated herein by reference, and this conveyance secures any and all extensions thereof, however evidenced; B. Payment of any sums advanced by Beneficiary to protect the Security pursuant to the terms and provisions of this Deed of Trust following a breach of Trustor's obligation to advance said sums and the expiration of any applicable cure period, with interest thereon as provided herein; C. Performance of every obligation, covenant or agreement of Trustor contained herein and in the Loan Documents; and D. All modifications, extensions and renewals of any of the Secured Obligations (including without limitation, (i) modifications, extensions or renewals at a different rate of interest, or (ii) deferrals or accelerations of the required principal payment dates or interest payment dates or both, in whole or in part), however evidenced, whether or not any such modification, extension or renewal is evidenced by a new or additional promissory note or notes. AND TO PROTECT THE SECURITY OF THIS DEED OF TRUST, TRUSTOR COVENANTS AND AGREES: ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS In addition to the terms defined elsewhere in this Deed of Trust, the following terms have the following meanings in this Deed of Trust: Section 1.1 The term "Default Rate" means the lesser of the maximum rate permitted by law and ten percent (10%) per annum. Section 1.2 The term "Intercreditor Agreement" means that certain Intercreditor Agreement of even date herewith, among Trustor, Beneficiary, and the City of Richmond, recorded concurrently herewith. Section 1.3 The term "Loan" means the loan made by Beneficiary to Trustor in the amount of One Million Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,994,807). Section 1.4 The term "Loan Agreement" means that certain Development Loan Agreement between Trustor and Beneficiary, of even date herewith, as such may be amended from time to time, providing for the Beneficiary to loan to Trustor the Loan. Section 1.5 The term "Loan Documents" means this Deed of Trust, the Note, the Loan Agreement, the Intercreditor Agreement, the Regulatory Agreement, and any other agreements, debt, loan or security instruments between Trustor and Beneficiary relating to the Loan. Section 1.6 The term "Note" means the promissory note of even date herewith, executed by Trustor in favor of Beneficiary, as it may be amended or restated in the amount of 863\104\3601263.2 4 the Loan, the payment of which is secured by this Deed of Trust. The terms and provisions of the Note are incorporated herein by reference. Section 1.7 The term "Principal" means the amounts required to be paid under the Note. Section 1.8 The term "Regulatory Agreement" means collectively, the following documents of even date herewith by and between Beneficiary and Trustor and recorded concurrently herewith: (i) the County Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants; and (ii) the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants. ARTICLE 2 MAINTENANCE AND MODIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY AND SECURITY Section 2.1 Maintenance and Modification of the Property by Trustor. The Trustor agrees that at all times prior to full payment and performance of the Secured Obligations, the Trustor will, at the Trustor's own expense, maintain, preserve and keep the Security or cause the Security to be maintained and preserved in good condition. The Trustor will from time to time make or cause to be made all repairs, replacements and renewals deemed proper and necessary by it. The Beneficiary has no responsibility in any of these matters or for the making of improvements or additions to the Security. Trustor agrees to pay fully and discharge (or cause to be paid fully and discharged) all claims for labor done and for material and services furnished in connection with the Security, diligently to file or procure the filing of a valid notice of cessation upon the event of a cessation of labor on the work or construction on the Security for a continuous period of thirty (30) days or more, and to take all other reasonable steps to forestall the assertion of claims of lien against the Security or any part thereof. Trustor irrevocably appoints, designates and authorizes Beneficiary as its agent (said agency being coupled with an interest) with the authority, but without any obligation, to file for record any notices of completion or cessation of labor or any other notice that Beneficiary deems necessary or desirable to protect its interest in and to the Security or the Loan Documents; provided, however, that Beneficiary exercises its rights as agent of Trustor only in the event that Trustor fails to take, or fails to diligently continue to take, those actions as hereinbefore provided. Upon demand by Beneficiary, Trustor shall make or cause to be made such demands or claims as Beneficiary specifies upon laborers, materialmen, subcontractors or other persons who have furnished or claim to have furnished labor, services or materials in connection with the Security. Nothing herein contained requires Trustor to pay any claims for labor, materials or services which Trustor in good faith disputes and is diligently contesting provided that Trustor shall, within thirty (30) days after the filing of any claim of lien, record in the Office of the Recorder of Contra Costa County, a surety bond in an amount 1 and 1/2 times the amount of such claim item to protect against a claim of lien. 863\104\3601263.2 5 Section 2.2 Granting of Easements. Trustor may not grant easements, licenses, rights-of-way or other rights or privileges in the nature of easements with respect to any property or rights included in the Security except those required or desirable for installation and maintenance of public utilities including, without limitation, water, gas, electricity, sewer, telephone and telegraph, or those required by law, and as approved, in writing, by Beneficiary. Section 2.3 Assignment of Rents. As part of the consideration for the indebtedness evidenced by the Note, Trustor hereby absolutely and unconditionally assigns and transfers to Beneficiary all the rents and revenues of the Property including those now due, past due, or to become due by virtue of any lease or other agreement for the occupancy or use of all or any part of the Property, regardless of to whom the rents and revenues of the Property are payable, subject to the rights of senior lenders that are approved by the Beneficiary pursuant to the Loan Agreement. Trustor hereby authorizes Beneficiary or Beneficiary's agents to collect the aforesaid rents and revenues and hereby directs each tenant of the Property to pay such rents to Beneficiary or Beneficiary's agents; provided, however, that prior to written notice given by Beneficiary to Trustor of the breach by Trustor of any covenant or agreement of Trustor in the Loan Documents, Trustor shall collect and receive all rents and revenues of the Property as trustee for the benefit of Beneficiary and Trustor to apply the rents and revenues so collected to the Secured Obligations with the balance, so long as no such breach has occurred and is continuing, to the account of Trustor, it being intended by Trustor and Beneficiary that this assignment of rents constitutes an absolute assignment and not an assignment for additional security only. Upon delivery of written notice by Beneficiary to Trustor of the breach by Trustor of any covenant or agreement of Trustor in the Loan Documents, and without the necessity of Beneficiary entering upon and taking and maintaining full control of the Property in person, by agent or by a court-appointed receiver, Beneficiary shall immediately be entitled to possession of all rents and revenues of the Property as specified in this Section 2.3 as the same becomes due and payable, including but not limited to, rents then due and unpaid, and all such rents will immediately upon delivery of such notice be held by Trustor as trustee for the benefit of Beneficiary only; provided, however, that the written notice by Beneficiary to Trustor of the breach by Trustor contains a statement that Beneficiary exercises its rights to such rents. Trustor agrees that commencing upon delivery of such written notice of Trustor's breach by Beneficiary to Trustor, each tenant of the Property shall make such rents payable to and pay such rents to Beneficiary or Beneficiary's agents on Beneficiary's written demand to each tenant therefor, delivered to each tenant personally, by mail or by delivering such demand to each rental unit, without any liability on the part of said tenant to inquire further as to the existence of a default by Trustor. Trustor hereby covenants that Trustor has not executed any prior assignment of said rents, other than as security to lenders approved by Beneficiary pursuant to the Loan Agreement, that Trustor has not performed, and will not perform, any acts or has not executed and will not execute, any instrument which would prevent Beneficiary from exercising its rights under this Section 2.3, and that at the time of execution of this Deed of Trust, there has been no anticipation or prepayment of any of the rents of the Property for more than two (2) months prior to the due dates of such rents. Trustor covenants that Trustor will not hereafter collect or accept payment 863\104\3601263.2 6 of any rents of the Property more than two (2) months prior to the due dates of such rents. Trustor further covenants that, so long as the Secured Obligations are outstanding, Trustor will execute and deliver to Beneficiary such further assignments of rents and revenues of the Property as Beneficiary may from time to time request. Upon Trustor's breach of any covenant or agreement of Trustor in the Loan Documents, Beneficiary may in person, by agent or by a court-appointed receiver, regardless of the adequacy of Beneficiary's security, enter upon and take and maintain full control of the Property in order to perform all acts necessary and appropriate for the operation and maintenance thereof including, but not limited to, the execution, cancellation or modification of leases, the collection of all rents and revenues of the Property, the making of repairs to the Property and the execution or termination of contracts providing for the management or maintenance of the Property, all on such terms as are deemed best to protect the security of this Deed of Trust. In the event Beneficiary elects to seek the appointment of a receiver for the Property upon Trustor's breach of any covenant or agreement of Trustor in this Deed of Trust, Trustor hereby expressly consents to the appointment of such receiver. Beneficiary or the receiver will be entitled to receive a reasonable fee for so managing the Property. All rents and revenues collected subsequent to delivery of written notice by Beneficiary to Trustor of the breach by Trustor of any covenant or agreement of Trustor in the Loan Documents are to be applied first to the costs, if any, of taking control of and managing the Property and collecting the rents, including, but not limited to, attorney's fees, receiver's fees, premiums on receiver's bonds, costs of repairs to the Property, premiums on insurance policies, taxes, assessments and other charges on the Property, and the costs of discharging any obligation or liability of Trustor as lessor or landlord of the Property and then to the sums secured by this deed of Trust. Beneficiary or the receiver is to have access to the books and records used in the operation and maintenance of the Property and will be liable to account only for those rents actually received. Beneficiary is not liable to Trustor, anyone claiming under or through Trustor or anyone having an interest in the Property by reason of anything done or left undone by Beneficiary under this Section 2.3. If the rents of the Property are not sufficient to meet the costs, if any, of taking control of and managing the Property and collecting the rents, any funds expended by Beneficiary for such purposes will become part of the Secured Obligations pursuant to Section 3.3 hereof. Unless Beneficiary and Trustor agree in writing to other terms of payment, such amounts are payable by Trustor to Beneficiary upon notice from Beneficiary to Trustor requesting payment thereof and will bear interest from the date of disbursement at the rate stated in Section 3.3. If the Beneficiary or the receiver enters upon and takes and maintains control of the Property, neither that act nor any application of rents as provided herein will cure or waive any default under this Deed of Trust or invalidate any other right or remedy available to Beneficiary under applicable law or under this Deed of Trust. This assignment of rents of the Property will terminate at such time as this Deed of Trust ceases to secure the Secured Obligations. 863\104\3601263.2 7 ARTICLE 3 TAXES AND INSURANCE; ADVANCES Section 3.1 Taxes, Other Governmental Charges and Utility Charges. Trustor shall pay, or cause to be paid, prior to the date of delinquency, all taxes, assessments, charges and levies imposed by any public authority or utility company that are or may become a lien affecting the Security or any part thereof; provided, however, that Trustor is not required to pay and discharge any such tax, assessment, charge or levy so long as (a) the legality thereof is promptly and actively contested in good faith and by appropriate proceedings, and (b) Trustor maintains reserves adequate to pay any liabilities contested pursuant to this Section 3.1. With respect to taxes, special assessments or other similar governmental charges, Trustor shall pay such amount in full prior to the attachment of any lien therefor on any part of the Security; provided, however, if such taxes, assessments or charges can be paid in installments, Trustor may pay in such installments. Except as provided in clause (b) of the first sentence of this paragraph, the provisions of this Section 3.1 may not be construed to require that Trustor maintain a reserve account, escrow account, impound account or other similar account for the payment of future taxes, assessments, charges and levies. In the event that Trustor fails to pay any of the items required by this Section to be paid by Trustor, Beneficiary may (but is under no obligation to) pay the same, after the Beneficiary has notified the Trustor of such failure to pay and the Trustor fails to fully pay such items within seven (7) business days after receipt of such notice. Any amount so advanced therefor by Beneficiary, together with interest thereon from the date of such advance at the maximum rate permitted by law, will become part of the Secured Obligations secured hereby, and Trustor agrees to pay all such amounts. Section 3.2 Provisions Respecting Insurance. Trustor agrees to provide insurance conforming in all respects to that required under the Loan Documents during the course of construction and following completion, and at all times until all amounts secured by this Deed of Trust have been paid, all Secured Obligations secured hereunder have been fulfilled, and this Deed of Trust has been reconveyed. All such insurance policies and coverages are to be maintained at Trustor's sole cost and expense. Certificates of insurance for all of the above insurance policies, showing the same to be in full force and effect, are to be delivered to the Beneficiary upon demand therefor at any time prior to Trustor's satisfaction of the Secured Obligations. Section 3.3 Advances. In the event the Trustor fails to maintain the full insurance coverage required by this Deed of Trust or fails to keep the Security in accordance with the Loan Documents, the Beneficiary, after at least seven (7) days prior notice to Trustor, may (but is under no obligation to) (i) take out the required policies of insurance and pay the premiums on the same, and (ii) make any repairs or replacements that are necessary and provide for payment thereof. All 863\104\3601263.2 8 amounts so advanced by the Beneficiary will become part of the Secured Obligations (together with interest as set forth below) and will be secured hereby, which amounts the Trustor agrees to pay on the demand of the Beneficiary, and if not so paid, will bear interest from the date of the advance at the Default Rate. ARTICLE 4 DAMAGE, DESTRUCTION OR CONDEMNATION Section 4.1 Awards and Damages. Subject to the rights of senior lenders, all judgments, awards of damages, settlements and compensation made in connection with or in lieu of (1) the taking of all or any part of or any interest in the Property by or under assertion of the power of eminent domain, (2) any damage to or destruction of the Property or any part thereof by insured casualty, and (3) any other injury or damage to all or any part of the Property (collectively, the "Funds") are hereby assigned to and are to be paid to the Beneficiary by a check made payable to the Beneficiary. The Beneficiary is authorized and empowered (but not required) to collect and receive any Funds and is authorized to apply them in whole or in part to any indebtedness or obligation secured hereby, in such order and manner as the Beneficiary determines at its sole option, subject to the provisions of Section 4.8 of the Loan Agreement regarding restoration of improvements following damage or destruction. The Beneficiary is entitled to settle and adjust all claims under insurance policies provided under this Deed of Trust and may deduct and retain from the proceeds of such insurance the amount of all expenses incurred by it in connection with any such settlement or adjustment. Application of all or any part of the Funds collected and received by the Beneficiary or the release thereof will not cure or waive any default under this Deed of Trust. ARTICLE 5 AGREEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY; FURTHER ASSURANCES; PAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST Section 5.1 Other Agreements Affecting Property. Trustor shall duly and punctually perform all terms, covenants, conditions and agreements binding upon it under the Loan Documents and any other agreement of any nature whatsoever now or hereafter involving or affecting the Security or any part thereof. Section 5.2 Agreement to Pay Attorneys' Fees and Expenses. In the event of any Event of Default (as defined in Section 7.1) hereunder, and if the Beneficiary employs attorneys or incurs other expenses for the collection of amounts due hereunder or the enforcement of performance or observance of an obligation or agreement on the part of the Trustor in this Deed of Trust, the Trustor agrees that it will, on demand therefor, pay to the Beneficiary the reasonable fees of such attorneys and such other reasonable expenses so incurred by the Beneficiary. Any such amounts paid by the Beneficiary will be added to the Secured Obligations, and will bear interest from the date such expenses are incurred at the Default Rate. 863\104\3601263.2 9 Section 5.3 Payment of the Principal. The Trustor shall pay to the Beneficiary the Principal and any other payments as set forth in the Note in the amounts and by the times set out therein. Section 5.4 Personal Property. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the personal property subject to this Deed of Trust is deemed to be fixtures and part of the real property and this Deed of Trust constitutes a fixtures filing under the California Commercial Code. As to any personal property not deemed or permitted to be fixtures, this Deed of Trust constitutes a security agreement under the California Commercial Code. Section 5.5 Financing Statement. The Trustor shall execute and deliver to the Beneficiary such financing statements pursuant to the appropriate statutes, and any other documents or instruments as are required to convey to the Beneficiary a valid perfected security interest in the Security. The Trustor shall perform all acts that the Beneficiary reasonably requests so as to enable the Beneficiary to maintain a valid perfected security interest in the Security in order to secure the payment of the Note in accordance with its terms. The Beneficiary is authorized to file a copy of any such financing statement in any jurisdiction(s) as it deems appropriate from time to time in order to protect the security interest established pursuant to this instrument. Section 5.6 Operation of the Security. The Trustor shall operate the Security (and, in case of a transfer of a portion of the Security subject to this Deed of Trust, the transferee shall operate such portion of the Security) in full compliance with the Loan Documents. Section 5.7 Inspection of the Security. At any and all reasonable times upon seventy-two (72) hours' notice, the Beneficiary and its duly authorized agents, attorneys, experts, engineers, accountants and representatives, may inspect the Security, without payment of charges or fees. Section 5.8 Nondiscrimination. The Trustor herein covenants by and for itself, its heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there will be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the Security, nor will the Trustor itself or any person claiming under or through it establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees in the Security. The foregoing covenants run with the land. 863\104\3601263.2 10 ARTICLE 6 HAZARDOUS WASTE Trustor shall keep and maintain the Property (including, but not limited to, soil and ground water conditions) in compliance with all Hazardous Materials Laws and shall not cause or permit the Property to be in violation of any Hazardous Materials Law (defined below). Trustor may not cause or permit the use, generation, manufacture, storage or disposal of on, under, or about the Property or transportation to or from the Property of (i) any substance, material, or waste that is petroleum, petroleum-related, or a petroleum by-product, asbestos or asbestos-containing material, polychlorinated biphenyls, flammable, explosive, radioactive, freon gas, radon, or a pesticide, herbicide, or any other agricultural chemical, and (ii) any waste, substance or material defined as or included in the definition of "hazardous substances," "hazardous wastes," "hazardous materials," "toxic materials", "toxic waste", "toxic substances," or words of similar import under any Hazardous Materials Law (collectively referred to hereinafter as "Hazardous Materials"), except such of the foregoing as may be customarily used in construction or operation of a multi-family residential development. Trustor shall immediately advise Beneficiary in writing if at any time it receives written notice of: (i) any and all enforcement, cleanup, removal or other governmental or regulatory actions instituted, completed or threatened against Trustor or the Property pursuant to any applicable federal, state or local laws, ordinances, or regulations relating to any Hazardous Materials, health, industrial hygiene, environmental conditions, or the regulation or protection of the environment, and all amendments thereto as of this date and to be added in the future and any successor statute or rule or regulation promulgated thereto ("Hazardous Materials Law"); (ii) all claims made or threatened by any third party against Trustor or the Property relating to damage, contribution, cost recovery compensation, loss or injury resulting from any Hazardous Materials (the matters set forth in clauses (i) and (ii) above are hereinafter referred to as "Hazardous Materials Claims"); and (iii) Trustor's discovery of any occurrence or condition on any real property adjoining or in the vicinity of the Property that could cause the Property or any part thereof to be subject to any restrictions on the ownership, occupancy, transferability or use of the Property under any Hazardous Materials Law including but not limited to the provisions of California Health and Safety Code, Section 25220 et seq., or any regulation adopted in accordance therewith. Beneficiary has the right to join and participate in, as a party if it so elects, and be represented by counsel acceptable to Beneficiary (or counsel of its own choice if a conflict exists with Trustor) in, any legal proceedings or actions initiated in connection with any Hazardous Materials Claims, and to have its reasonable attorneys' fees in connection therewith paid by Trustor. Trustor shall indemnify and hold harmless Beneficiary and its boardmembers, directors, officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns from and against any loss, damage, cost, fine, penalty, judgment, award, settlement, expense or liability, directly or indirectly arising out of or attributable to: (i) any actual or alleged past or present violation of any Hazardous Materials Law; (ii) any Hazardous Materials Claim; (iii) any actual or alleged past or present use, generation, manufacture, storage, release, threatened release, discharge, disposal, transportation, 863\104\3601263.2 11 or presence of Hazardous Materials on, under, or about the Property; (iv) any investigation, cleanup, remediation, removal, or restoration work of site conditions of the Property relating to Hazardous Materials (whether on the Property or any other property); and (v) the breach of any representation of warranty by or covenant of Trustor in this Article, and Section 5.1(l) of the Loan Agreement. Such indemnity must include, without limitation: (x) all consequential damages; (y) the costs of any required or necessary investigation, repair, cleanup or detoxification of the Property and the preparation and implementation of any closure, remedial or other required plans; and (z) all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by Beneficiary in connection with clauses (x) and (y), including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees and consultant fees. This indemnification applies whether or not any government agency has issued a cleanup order. Losses, claims, costs, suits, liability, and expenses covered by this indemnification provision include, but are not limited to: (1) losses attributable to diminution in the value of the Property; (2) loss or restriction of use of rentable space on the Property; (3) adverse effect on the marketing of any rental space on the Property; and (4) penalties and fines levied by, and remedial or enforcement actions of any kind issued by any regulatory agency (including but not limited to the costs of any required testing, remediation, repair, removal, cleanup or detoxification of the Property and surrounding properties). This obligation to indemnify will survive reconveyance of this Deed of Trust and will not be diminished or affected in any respect as a result of any notice, disclosure, knowledge, if any, to or by Beneficiary of Hazardous Materials. Without Beneficiary's prior written consent, which may not be unreasonably withheld, Trustor may not take any remedial action in response to the presence of any Hazardous Materials on, under or about the Property, nor enter into any settlement agreement, consent decree, or other compromise in respect to any Hazardous Material Claims, which remedial action, settlement, consent decree or compromise might, in Beneficiary's reasonable judgment, impairs the value of the Beneficiary's security hereunder; provided, however, that Beneficiary's prior consent is not necessary in the event that the presence of Hazardous Materials on, under, or about the Property either poses an immediate threat to the health, safety or welfare of any individual or is of such a nature that an immediate remedial response is necessary and it is not reasonably possible to obtain Beneficiary's consent before taking such action, provided that in such event Trustor notifies Beneficiary as soon as practicable of any action so taken. Beneficiary agrees not to withhold its consent, where such consent is required hereunder, if (i) a particular remedial action is ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction; (ii) Trustor will or may be subjected to civil or criminal sanctions or penalties if it fails to take a required action; (iii) Trustor establishes to the reasonable satisfaction of Beneficiary that there is no reasonable alternative to such remedial action which would result in less impairment of Beneficiary's security hereunder; or (iv) the action has been agreed to by Beneficiary. The Trustor hereby acknowledges and agrees that (i) this Article is intended as the Beneficiary's written request for information (and the Trustor's response) concerning the environmental condition of the Property as required by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5, and (ii) each representation and warranty in this Deed of Trust or any of the other Loan Documents (together with any indemnity applicable to a breach of any such representation and warranty) with respect to the environmental condition of the property is intended by the Beneficiary and the Trustor to be an "environmental provision" for purposes of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 736. 863\104\3601263.2 12 In the event that any portion of the Property is determined to be "environmentally impaired" (as that term is defined in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(e)(3) or to be an "affected parcel" (as that term is defined in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(e)(1), then, without otherwise limiting or in any way affecting the Beneficiary's or the Trustee's rights and remedies under this Deed of Trust, the Beneficiary may elect to exercise its rights under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(a) to (1) waive its lien on such environmentally impaired or affected portion of the Property and (2) exercise (a) the rights and remedies of an unsecured creditor, including reduction of its claim against the Trustor to judgment, and (b) any other rights and remedies permitted by law. For purposes of determining the Beneficiary's right to proceed as an unsecured creditor under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(a), the Trustor will be deemed to have willfully permitted or acquiesced in a release or threatened release of hazardous materials, within the meaning of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(d)(1), if the release or threatened release of hazardous materials was knowingly or negligently caused or contributed to by any lessee, occupant, or user of any portion of the Property and the Trustor knew or should have known of the activity by such lessee, occupant, or user which caused or contributed to the release or threatened release. All costs and expenses, including (but not limited to) attorneys' fees, incurred by the Beneficiary in connection with any action commenced under this paragraph, including any action required by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(b) to determine the degree to which the Property is environmentally impaired, plus interest thereon at the Default Rate until paid, will be added to the indebtedness secured by this Deed of Trust and will be due and payable to the Beneficiary upon its demand made at any time following the conclusion of such action. ARTICLE 7 EVENTS OF DEFAULT AND REMEDIES Section 7.1 Events of Default. The following are events of default following the expiration of any applicable notice and cure periods (each an "Event of Default"): (i) failure to make any payment to be paid by Trustor under the Loan Documents; (ii) failure to observe or perform any of Trustor's other covenants, agreements or obligations under the Loan Documents, including, without limitation, the provisions concerning discrimination; (iii) failure to make any payment or observe or perform any of Trustor's other covenants, agreements, or obligations under any Secured Obligations, which default is not cured within the times and in the manner provided therein; and (iv) failure to make any payments or observe or perform any of Trustor's other covenants, agreements or obligations under any other debt instrument or regulatory agreement secured by the Property, which default is not cured within the time and in the manner provided therein. Section 7.2 Acceleration of Maturity. If an Event of Default has occurred and is continuing, then at the option of the Beneficiary, the amount of any payment related to the Event of Default and all unpaid Secured Obligations are immediately due and payable, and no omission on the part of the Beneficiary to exercise such option when entitled to do so may be construed as a waiver of such right. 863\104\3601263.2 13 Section 7.3 The Beneficiary's Right to Enter and Take Possession. If an Event of Default has occurred and is continuing, the Beneficiary may: (a) Either in person or by agent, with or without bringing any action or proceeding, or by a receiver appointed by a court, and without regard to the adequacy of its security, enter upon the Property and take possession thereof (or any part thereof) and of any of the Security, in its own name or in the name of Trustee, and do any acts that it deems necessary or desirable to preserve the value or marketability of the Property, or part thereof or interest therein, increase the income therefrom or protect the security thereof. The entering upon and taking possession of the Security will not cure or waive any Event of Default or Notice of Sale (as defined in Section 7.3(c), below) hereunder or invalidate any act done in response to such Event of Default or pursuant to such Notice of Sale, and, notwithstanding the continuance in possession of the Security, Beneficiary will be entitled to exercise every right provided for in this Deed of Trust, or by law upon occurrence of any Event of Default, including the right to exercise the power of sale; (b) Commence an action to foreclose this Deed of Trust as a mortgage, appoint a receiver, or specifically enforce any of the covenants hereof; (c) Deliver to Trustee a written declaration of an Event of Default and demand for sale, and a written notice of default and election to cause Trustor's interest in the Security to be sold ("Notice of Sale"), which notice Trustee or Beneficiary shall cause to be duly filed for record in the Official Records of Contra Costa County; or (d) Exercise all other rights and remedies provided herein, in the instruments by which the Trustor acquires title to any Security, or in any other document or agreement now or hereafter evidencing, creating or securing the Secured Obligations. Section 7.4 Foreclosure By Power of Sale. Should the Beneficiary elect to foreclose by exercise of the power of sale herein contained, the Beneficiary shall deliver to the Trustee the Notice of Sale and shall deposit with Trustee this Deed of Trust which is secured hereby (and the deposit of which will be deemed to constitute evidence that the Secured Obligations are immediately due and payable), and such receipts and evidence of any expenditures made that are additionally secured hereby as Trustee may require. (a) Upon receipt of the Notice of Sale from the Beneficiary, Trustee shall cause to be recorded, published and delivered to Trustor such Notice of Sale as is then required by law and by this Deed of Trust. Trustee shall, without demand on Trustor, after the lapse of that amount of time as is then required by law and after recordation of such Notice of Sale as required by law, sell the Security, at the time and place of sale set forth in the Notice of Sale, whether as a whole or in separate lots or parcels or items, as Trustee deems expedient and in such order as it determines, unless specified otherwise by the Trustor according to California Civil Code Section 2924g(b), at public auction to the highest bidder, for cash in lawful money of the United States payable at the time of sale. Trustee shall deliver to such purchaser or purchasers thereof its good and sufficient deed or deeds conveying the property so sold, but 863\104\3601263.2 14 without any covenant or warranty, express or implied. The recitals in such deed or any matters of facts will be conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof. Any person, including, without limitation, Trustor, Trustee or Beneficiary, may purchase at such sale. (b) After deducting all reasonable costs, fees and expenses of Trustee, including costs of evidence of title in connection with such sale, Trustee shall apply the proceeds of sale to payment of: (i) the unpaid Principal amount of the Note; (ii) all other Secured Obligations owed to Beneficiary under the Loan Documents; (iii) all other sums then secured hereby; and (iv) the remainder, if any, to Trustor. (c) Trustee may postpone sale of all or any portion of the Property by public announcement at such time and place of sale, and from time to time thereafter, and without further notice make such sale at the time fixed by the last postponement, or may, in its discretion, give a new Notice of Sale. Section 7.5 Receiver. If an Event of Default occurs and is continuing, Beneficiary, as a matter of right and without further notice to Trustor or anyone claiming under the Security, and without regard to the then value of the Security or the interest of Trustor therein, may apply to any court having jurisdiction to appoint a receiver or receivers of the Security (or a part thereof), and Trustor hereby irrevocably consents to such appointment and waives further notice of any application therefor. Any such receiver or receivers will have all the usual powers and duties of receivers in like or similar cases, and all the powers and duties of Beneficiary in case of entry as provided herein, and will continue as such and exercise all such powers until the date of confirmation of sale of the Security, unless such receivership is sooner terminated. Section 7.6 Remedies Cumulative. No right, power or remedy conferred upon or reserved to the Beneficiary by this Deed of Trust is intended to be exclusive of any other right, power or remedy, but each and every such right, power and remedy will be cumulative and concurrent and will be in addition to any other right, power and remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity. Section 7.7 No Waiver. (a) No delay or omission of the Beneficiary to exercise any right, power or remedy accruing upon any Event of Default will exhaust or impair any such right, power or remedy, and may not be construed to be a waiver of any such Event of Default or acquiescence therein; and every right, power and remedy given by this Deed of Trust to the Beneficiary may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expeditious by the Beneficiary. Beneficiary's express or implied consent to breach, or waiver of, any obligation of the Trustor hereunder will not be deemed or construed to be a consent to any subsequent breach, or further waiver, of such obligation or of any other obligations of the Trustor hereunder. Failure on the part of the Beneficiary to complain of any act or failure to act or to declare an Event of Default, irrespective of how long such failure continues, will not constitute a waiver by the Beneficiary of its right hereunder or impair any rights, power or remedies consequent on any Event of Default by the Trustor. 863\104\3601263.2 15 (b) If the Beneficiary (i) grants forbearance or an extension of time for the payment or performance of any Secured Obligation, (ii) takes other or additional security or the payment of any sums secured hereby, (iii) waives or does not exercise any right granted in the Loan Documents, (iv) releases any part of the Security from the lien of this Deed of Trust, or otherwise changes any of the terms, covenants, conditions or agreements in the Loan Documents, (v) consents to the granting of any easement or other right affecting the Security, or (vi) makes or consents to any agreement subordinating the lien hereof, any such act or omission will not release, discharge, modify, change or affect the original liability under this Deed of Trust, or any other obligation of the Trustor or any subsequent purchaser of the Security or any part thereof, or any maker, co-signer, endorser, surety or guarantor (unless expressly released); nor will any such act or omission preclude the Beneficiary from exercising any right, power or privilege herein granted or intended to be granted in any Event of Default then made or of any subsequent Event of Default, nor, except as otherwise expressly provided in an instrument or instruments executed by the Beneficiary, will the lien of this Deed of Trust be altered thereby. Section 7.8 Suits to Protect the Security. The Beneficiary has the power to (a) institute and maintain such suits and proceedings as it may deem expedient to prevent any impairment of the Security and the rights of the Beneficiary as may be unlawful or any violation of this Deed of Trust, (b) preserve or protect its interest (as described in this Deed of Trust) in the Security, and (c) restrain the enforcement of or compliance with any legislation or other governmental enactment, rule or order that may be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, if the enforcement for compliance with such enactment, rule or order would impair the Security thereunder or be prejudicial to the interest of the Beneficiary. Section 7.9 Trustee May File Proofs of Claim. In the case of any receivership, insolvency, bankruptcy, reorganization, arrangement, adjustment, composition or other proceedings affecting the Trustor, its creditors or its property, the Beneficiary, to the extent permitted by law, will be entitled to file such proofs of claim and other documents as may be necessary or advisable in order to have the claims of the Beneficiary allowed in such proceedings and for any additional amount that becomes due and payable by the Trustor hereunder after such date. Section 7.10 Waiver. The Trustor waives presentment, demand for payment, notice of dishonor, notice of protest and nonpayment, protest, notice of interest on interest and late charges, and diligence in taking any action to collect any Secured Obligations or in proceedings against the Security, in connection with the delivery, acceptance, performance, default, endorsement or guaranty of this Deed of Trust. 863\104\3601263.2 16 ARTICLE 8 MISCELLANEOUS Section 8.1 Amendments. This Deed of Trust cannot be waived, changed, discharged or terminated orally, but only by an instrument in writing signed by Beneficiary and Trustor. Section 8.2 Reconveyance by Trustee. Upon written request of Beneficiary stating that all Secured Obligations have been paid or forgiven, and all obligations under the Loan Documents have been performed in full, and upon surrender of this Deed of Trust to Trustee for cancellation and retention, and upon payment by Trustor of Trustee's reasonable fees, Trustee shall reconvey the Security to Trustor, or to the person or persons legally entitled thereto. Section 8.3 Notices. If at any time after the execution of this Deed of Trust it becomes necessary or convenient for one of the parties hereto to serve any notice, demand or communication upon the other party, such notice, demand or communication must be in writing and is to be served personally or by depositing the same in the registered United States mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and (1) if intended for Beneficiary is to be addressed to: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attention: Assistant Deputy Director and (2) if intended for Trustor is to be addressed to: Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership c/o Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond 1535 A Fred Jackson Way Richmond, CA 94801 Attention: Executive Director Any notice, demand or communication will be deemed given, received, made or communicated on the date personal delivery is effected or, if mailed in the manner herein specified, on the delivery date or date delivery is refused by the addressee, as shown on the return receipt. Either party may change its address at any time by giving written notice of such change to Beneficiary or Trustor as the case may be, in the manner provided herein, at least ten (10) days prior to the date such change is desired to be effective. 863\104\3601263.2 17 Section 8.4 Successors and Joint Trustors. Where an obligation created herein is binding upon Trustor, the obligation also applies to and binds any transferee or successors in interest. Where the terms of the Deed of Trust have the effect of creating an obligation of the Trustor and a transferee, such obligation will be deemed to be a joint and several obligation of the Trustor and such transferee. Where Trustor is more than one entity or person, all obligations of Trustor will be deemed to be a joint and several obligation of each and every entity and person comprising Trustor. Section 8.5 Captions. The captions or headings at the beginning of each Section hereof are for the convenience of the parties and are not a part of this Deed of Trust. Section 8.6 Invalidity of Certain Provisions. Every provision of this Deed of Trust is intended to be severable. In the event any term or provision hereof is declared to be illegal or invalid for any reason whatsoever by a court or other body of competent jurisdiction, such illegality or invalidity will not affect the balance of the terms and provisions hereof, which terms and provisions will remain binding and enforceable. If the lien of this Deed of Trust is invalid or unenforceable as to any part of the debt, or if the lien is invalid or unenforceable as to any part of the Security, the unsecured or partially secured portion of the debt, and all payments made on the debt, whether voluntary or under foreclosure or other enforcement action or procedure, will be considered to have been first paid or applied to the full payment of that portion of the debt that is not secured or partially secured by the lien of this Deed of Trust. Section 8.7 Governing Law. This Deed of Trust is governed by the laws of the State of California. Section 8.8 Gender and Number. In this Deed of Trust the singular includes the plural and the masculine includes the feminine and neuter and vice versa, if the context so requires. Section 8.9 Deed of Trust, Mortgage. Any reference in this Deed of Trust to a mortgage also refers to a deed of trust and any reference to a deed of trust also refers to a mortgage. Section 8.10 Actions. Trustor shall appear in and defend any action or proceeding purporting to affect the Security. Section 8.11 Substitution of Trustee. Beneficiary may from time to time substitute a successor or successors to any Trustee 863\104\3601263.2 18 named herein or acting hereunder to execute this Trust. Upon such appointment, and without conveyance to the successor trustee, the latter will be vested with all title, powers, and duties conferred upon any Trustee herein named or acting hereunder. Each such appointment and substitution is to be made by written instrument executed by Beneficiary, containing reference to this Deed of Trust and its place of record, which, when duly recorded in the proper office of the county or counties in which the Property is situated, will be conclusive proof of proper appointment of the successor trustee. Section 8.12 Statute of Limitations. The pleading of any statute of limitations as a defense to any and all obligations secured by this Deed of Trust is hereby waived to the full extent permissible by law. Section 8.13 Acceptance by Trustee. Trustee accepts this Trust when this Deed of Trust, duly executed and acknowledged, is made public record as provided by law. Except as otherwise provided by law, the Trustee is not obligated to notify any party hereto of a pending sale under this Deed of Trust or of any action or proceeding in which Trustor, Beneficiary, or Trustee is a party unless brought by Trustee. Section 8.14 Tax Credit Provisions. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein or in any documents secured by this Deed of Trust or contained in any subordination agreement, and to the extent applicable, the Beneficiary acknowledges and agrees that in the event of a foreclosure or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure (collectively, "Foreclosure") with respect to the Security encumbered by this Deed of Trust, the following rule contained in 26 U.S.C. Section 42(h)(6)(E)(ii), as amended, applies: For a period of three (3) years from the date of Foreclosure, with respect to an existing tenant of any low-income unit, (i) such tenant may not be subject to eviction or termination of their tenancy (other than for good cause), (ii) nor may such tenant's gross rent with respect to such unit be increased, except as otherwise permitted under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code. [signature on following page] Signature page County Deed of Trust 863\104\3601263.2 19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Trustor has executed this Deed of Trust as of the day and year first above written. CHESLEY AVENUE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP a California limited partnership By: Chesley Avenue LLC, a California limited liability company, its general partner By: Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, its sole member and manager By: ____________________________ Don Gilmore, Executive Director 863\104\3601263.2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. A-1 863\104\3601263.2 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION The land referred to is situated in the County of Contra Costa, City of Richmond, State of California, and is described as follows: Lots 8 through 28, Block 210, Map of Walls Second Addition, filed March 4, 1912, Map Book 6, Page 140, Contra Costa County Records. APN: 561-251-003-1 863\104\3601225.2 1 Chesley PROMISSORY NOTE (HOME and CDBG Loan) $1,994,807 Martinez, California February 15, 2024 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("Borrower") hereby promises to pay to the order of the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California ("Holder"), the principal amount of One Million Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,994,807) plus interest thereon pursuant to Section 2 below. All capitalized terms used but not defined in this Note have the meanings set forth in the Development Loan Agreement between Borrower and Holder of even date herewith (the "Loan Agreement"). 1. Borrower's Obligation. This promissory note (the "Note") evidences Borrower's obligation to repay Holder the principal amount of One Million Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,994,807) with interest for the funds loaned to Borrower by Holder to finance the rehabilitation of the Development pursuant to the Development Loan Agreement. 2. Interest. (a) Subject to the provisions of Subsection (b) below, the Loan bears simple interest at a rate of three percent (3%) per annum from the date of disbursement until full repayment of the principal balance of the Loan. (b) If an Event of Default occurs, interest will accrue on all amounts due under this Note at the Default Rate until such Event of Default is cured by Borrower or waived by Holder. 3. Term and Repayment Requirements. Principal and interest under this Note is due and payable as set forth in Section 2.8 of the Loan Agreement. The unpaid principal balance hereunder, together with accrued interest thereon, is due and payable no later than the date that is the fifty-fifth (55th) anniversary of the Completion Date; provided, however, if a record of the Completion Date cannot be located or established, the Loan is due and payable on the fifty- seventh (57th) anniversary of the date of this Note. 4. No Assumption. This Note is not assumable by the successors and assigns of Borrower without the prior written consent of Holder, except as provided in the Loan Agreement. 5. Security. This Note, with interest, is secured by the Deed of Trust. Upon execution, the Deed of Trust will be recorded in the official records of Contra Costa County, California. Upon recordation of the Deed of Trust, this Note will become nonrecourse to 863\104\3601225.2 2 Borrower, pursuant to and except as provided in Section 2.10 of the Loan Agreement, which Section 2.10 is hereby incorporated into this Note. The terms of the Deed of Trust are hereby incorporated into this Note and made a part hereof. 6. Terms of Payment. (a) Borrower shall make all payments due under this Note in currency of the United States of America to Holder at Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553, Attention: Assistant Deputy Director, or to such other place as Holder may from time to time designate. (b) All payments on this Note are without expense to Holder. Borrower shall pay all costs and expenses, including re-conveyance fees and reasonable attorney's fees of Holder, incurred in connection with the enforcement of this Note and the release of any security hereof. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Note, or any instrument securing the obligations of Borrower under this Note, if, for any reason whatsoever, the payment of any sums by Borrower pursuant to the terms of this Note would result in the payment of interest that exceeds the amount that Holder may legally charge under the laws of the State of California, then the amount by which payments exceed the lawful interest rate will automatically be deducted from the principal balance owing on this Note, so that in no event is Borrower obligated under the terms of this Note to pay any interest that would exceed the lawful rate. (d) The obligations of Borrower under this Note are absolute and Borrower waives any and all rights to offset, deduct or withhold any payments or charges due under this Note for any reason whatsoever. 7. Event of Default; Acceleration. (a) Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, the entire unpaid principal balance, together with all interest thereon, and together with all other sums then payable under this Note and the Deed of Trust will, at the option of Holder, become immediately due and payable without further demand. (b) Holder's failure to exercise the remedy set forth in Subsection 7(a) above or any other remedy provided by law upon the occurrence of an Event of Default does not constitute a waiver of the right to exercise any remedy at any subsequent time in respect to the same or any other Event of Default. The acceptance by Holder of any payment that is less than the total of all amounts due and payable at the time of such payment does not constitute a waiver of the right to exercise any of the foregoing remedies or options at that time or at any subsequent time, or nullify any prior exercise of any such remedy or option, without the express consent of Holder, except as and to the extent otherwise provided by law. 8. Waivers. 863\104\3601225.2 3 (a) Borrower hereby waives diligence, presentment, protest and demand, and notice of protest, notice of demand, notice of dishonor and notice of non-payment of this Note. Borrower expressly agrees that this Note or any payment hereunder may be extended from time to time, and that Holder may accept further security or release any security for this Note, all without in any way affecting the liability of Borrower. (b) Any extension of time for payment of this Note or any installment hereof made by agreement of Holder with any person now or hereafter liable for payment of this Note must not operate to release, discharge, modify, change or affect the original liability of Borrower under this Note, either in whole or in part. 9. Miscellaneous Provisions. (a) All notices to Holder or Borrower are to be given in the manner and at the addresses set forth in the Loan Agreement, or to such addresses as Holder and Borrower may therein designate. (b) Borrower promises to pay all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by Holder in the enforcement of the provisions of this Note, regardless of whether suit is filed to seek enforcement. (c) This Note is governed by the laws of the State of California. (d) The times for the performance of any obligations hereunder are to be strictly construed, time being of the essence. (e) The Loan Documents, of which this Note is a part, contain the entire agreement between the parties as to the Loan. This Note may not be modified except upon the written consent of the parties. signature on following page Signature page County Note 863\104\3601225.2 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Borrower is executing this Promissory Note as of the day and year first above written. CHESLEY AVENUE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP a California limited partnership By: Chesley Avenue LLC, a California limited liability company, its general partner By: Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, its sole member and manager By: ____________________________ Don Gilmore, Executive Director 1 863\104\3601415.2 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Assistant Deputy Director No fee for recording pursuant to Government Code Section 27383 and 27388.1 __________________________________________________________________________ HOME/CDBG REGULATORY AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS (Chesley Mutual Housing) This HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants (the "HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement") is dated February 15, 2024 and is between the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), and Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("Borrower"). RECITALS A. Defined terms used but not defined in these recitals are as defined in Article 1 of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. B. The County has received Home Investment Partnerships Act ("HOME") funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") pursuant to the Cranston-Gonzales National Housing Act of 1990 ("HOME Funds"). The HOME Funds must be used by the County in accordance with 24 C.F.R. Part 92. C. The County has received Community Development Block Grant Program ("CDBG") funds from HUD under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 USC 5301, et seq.), as amended ("CDBG Funds"). The CDBG Funds must be used by the County in accordance with 24 C.F.R. Part 570. D. Borrower is the owner of the real property commonly known as 802 Chesley Avenue, located in the County of Contra Costa, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit A (the "Property"). Borrower intends to rehabilitate the thirty (30) multifamily housing units currently existing on the Property, of which twenty-nine (29) are for rental to extremely low and very low income households, and one (1) is a manager's unit (the "Development"). The Development, as well as all landscaping, roads and parking spaces on the Property and any additional improvements on the Property, are the "Improvements". 2 863\104\3601415.2 E. Pursuant to a Development Loan Agreement of even date herewith between the County and Borrower (the "Loan Agreement"), the County is lending Borrower One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) of HOME Funds and Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($994,807) of CDBG Funds for a total loan of One Million Nine Hundred Ninety- Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,994,807) (the "County Loan") to assist in the rehabilitation of the Development. F. In addition to the Loan Agreement and this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, the County Loan is evidenced and secured by the following documents: (i) a deed of trust with assignment of rents, security agreement, and fixture filing of even date herewith, among Borrower, as trustor, Old Republic Title Company, as trustee, and the County, as beneficiary; (ii) an intercreditor agreement of even date herewith among the City, the County, and Borrower; (iii) a promissory note executed by Borrower of even date herewith in the amount of the County Loan; and (iv) the County Regulatory Agreement, executed by Borrower of even date herewith, (collectively, the "Loan Documents"). The Loan Documents are described in more detail in the Loan Agreement. G. The County has the authority to lend the County Loan to Borrower pursuant to Government Code Section 26227, which authorizes counties to spend county funds for programs that will further a county's public purposes. In addition, the County has the authority to loan (i) the HOME Funds pursuant to 24 C.F.R. 92.205, and (ii) the CBDG Funds pursuant to 24 C.F.R. 570.202. H. The County has agreed to make the County Loan on the condition that Borrower maintain and operate the Development in accordance with restrictions set forth in this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement and the County Regulatory Agreement, and in the related documents evidencing the County Loan. Twenty-nine (29) of the Units are restricted by the County pursuant to this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. I. As it applies to the HOME-Assisted Units this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will be in effect for the HOME Term. The County Regulatory Agreement as it applies to the HOME-Assisted Units will be in effect for fifty-five (55) years from the Completion Date which term overlaps with but is longer than the HOME Term. Pursuant to Section 6.16 below, compliance with the terms of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will be deemed compliance with the County Regulatory Agreement during the HOME Term with respect to the HOME-Assisted Units. J. In consideration of receipt of the County Loan at an interest rate substantially below the market rate, Borrower agrees to observe all the terms and conditions set forth below. The parties therefore agree as follows: 3 863\104\3601415.2 AGREEMENT ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS 1.1 Definitions. The following terms have the following meanings: (a) "Accessibility Requirements" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.1(e). (b) "Actual Household Size" means the actual number of persons in the applicable household. (c) "Adjusted Income" means with respect to the Tenant of each County- Assisted Unit, the Tenant’s total anticipated annual income as defined in 24 CFR 5.609 and calculated pursuant to 24 CFR 5.611, and as further referenced in 24 CFR 92.203(b)(1). (d) "Assumed Household Size" means the household size "adjusted for family size appropriate to the unit" as such term is defined in Health & Safety Code Section 50052.5(h), used to calculate Rent, provided that if a different calculation is required by the HOME Requirements, such calculation must be used for the HOME-Assisted Units. (e) "CDBG" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (f) "CDBG-Assisted Units" means the twenty-nine (29) Units to be rehabilitated on the Property that are restricted to occupancy by Extremely Low Income Households, Forty Percent Income Households, and Very Low Income Households in compliance with Section 2.1 below. (g) "CDBG Funds" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (h) "City" means the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation. (i) "Completion Date" means the date a final certificate of occupancy, or equivalent document (such as a construction permit sign off for rehabilitation projects) is issued by the City to certify that the Development may be legally occupied. (j) "County-Assisted Units" means the CDBG-Assisted Units and the HOME-Assisted Units. (k) "County Loan" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph E of the Recitals. (l) "County Regulatory Agreement" means the Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants of even date herewith, between the County and Borrower evidencing County requirements applicable to the County Loan, to be recorded against the Property concurrently herewith. 4 863\104\3601415.2 (m) "Deed of Trust" means the Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement and Fixture Filing of even date herewith by and among Borrower, as trustor, Old Republic Title Company, as trustee, and the County, as beneficiary, that encumbers the Property to secure repayment of the County Loan and Borrower's performance of the Loan Documents. (n) "Development" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (o) "Development Regulatory Documents" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.2(a). (p) "Existing Tenants" means the tenants that occupy the Development on the date of the recordation of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (q) "Extremely Low Income Household" means a household (i) with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of Median Income, adjusted for Actual Household Size, and (ii) that is not an individual student not eligible to receive Section 8 assistance under 24 C.F.R. 5.612. (r) "Extremely Low Income Rent" means one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of thirty percent (30%) of Median Income, adjusted for Assumed Household Size. (s) "Extremely Low Income Units" means the Units which, pursuant to Section 2.1(a) below, are required to be occupied by Extremely Low Income Households. (t) "Forty Percent Income Household" means a household (i) with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed forty percent (40%) of Median Income, adjusted for Actual Household Size, and (ii) that is not an individual student not eligible to receive Section 8 assistance under 24 C.F.R. 5.612. (u) "Forty-Percent Income Rent" means one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of forty percent (40%) of Median Income, adjusted for Assumed Household Size. (v) "Forty Percent Income Units" means the Units which, pursuant to Section 2.1(b) below, are required to be occupied by Forty Percent Income Households. (w) "High HOME Rent" means a monthly Rent that does not exceed the maximum rent published by HUD for a Low Income Household for the applicable bedroom size as set forth in 24 C.F.R. 92.252(a). (x) "HOME" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (y) "HOME-Assisted Units" means the two (2) Extremely Low Income Units, seven (7) Forty Percent Income Units, and four (4) Very Low Income Units to be rehabilitated on the Property that overlap with the CDBG-Assisted Units and are "floating" Units as defined in 24 C.F.R. 92.252(j). 5 863\104\3601415.2 (z) "HOME Eligible Household" means an Extremely Low Income Household, a Forty Percent Income Household, or a Very Low Income Household. (aa) "HOME Funds" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (bb) "HOME Requirements" means the regulations governing the use of HOME Funds set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 92. (cc) "HOME Term" means the term of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement which commences as of the date of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and unless sooner terminated pursuant to the terms of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, expires on the twenty-first (21st) anniversary of the Completion Date; provided, however, if a record of the Completion Date cannot be located or established, the HOME Term will expire on the twenty-third (23rd) anniversary of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (dd) "HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement" has the meaning set forth in the first paragraph of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (ee) "HUD" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (ff) "Improvements" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (gg) "Loan Agreement" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph E of the Recitals. (hh) "Loan Documents" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph F of the Recitals. (ii) "Low HOME Rent" means a monthly Rent that does not exceed the maximum rent published by HUD for a Very Low Income Household for the applicable bedroom size as set forth in 24 C.F.R. 92.252(b). (jj) "Low Income Household" means a household (i) with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed eighty percent (80%) of Median Income, with adjustments for smaller and larger families, except that HUD may establish income ceilings higher or lower than eighty percent (80%) of Median Income on the basis of HUD findings that such variations are necessary because of prevailing levels of construction costs or fair market rents, or unusually high or low family incomes, as such definition may be amended pursuant to 24 C.F.R. Section 92.2, and (ii) that is not an individual student not eligible to receive Section 8 assistance under 24 C.F.R. 5.612. (kk) "Maintenance Standards" has the meaning set forth in Section 5.6 (a). (ll) "Marketing Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.3(a). (mm) "Median Income" means the median gross yearly income, adjusted for Actual Household Size as specified herein, in the County of Contra Costa, California, as published from time to time by HUD. In the event that such income determinations are no 6 863\104\3601415.2 longer published, or are not updated for a period of at least eighteen (18) months, the County shall provide Borrower with other income determinations that are reasonably similar with respect to methods of calculation to those previously published by HUD. (nn) "Operating Budget" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.5(a). (oo) "Partnership Agreement" means the agreement between Borrower's general partner and limited partner that governs the operation and organization of Borrower as a California limited partnership. (pp) "Property" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (qq) "Rent" means the total monthly payments by the Tenant of a Unit for the following: use and occupancy of the Unit and land and associated facilities; any separately charged fees or service charges assessed by Borrower which are customarily charged in rental housing and required of all Tenants (subject to the limitations set forth in 24 C.F.R. 92.214(b)(3)), other than security deposits; an allowance for the cost of an adequate level of service for utilities paid by the Tenant, including garbage collection, sewer, water, electricity, gas and other heating, cooking and refrigeration fuel, but not telephone service or cable TV; and any other interest, taxes, fees or charges for use of the land or associated facilities and assessed by a public or private entity other than Borrower, and paid by the Tenant. (rr) "Rental Subsidy" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.5(a). (ss) "Subsidy Units" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.5(a). (tt) "Technology Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.3(c). (uu) "Tenant" means the tenant household that occupies a Unit in the Development. (vv) "Tenant Selection Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.3(b). (ww) "Transfer" has the meaning set forth in Section 6.1. (xx) "Unit(s)" means one (1) or more of the units in the Development. (yy) "Very Low Income Household" means a household (i) with an Adjusted Income that does not exceed fifty percent (50%) of Median Income, with adjustments for smaller and larger families, except that HUD may establish income ceilings higher or lower than fifty percent (50%) of Median Income on the basis of HUD findings that such variations are necessary because of prevailing levels of construction costs or fair market rents, or unusually high or low family incomes as set forth in 24 C.F.R. Section 92.2, and (ii) that is not an individual student not eligible to receive Section 8 assistance under 24 C.F.R. 5.612. (zz) "Very Low Income Units" means the Units which, pursuant to Section 2.1(c) below, are required to be occupied by Very Low Income Households. 7 863\104\3601415.2 ARTICLE 2 AFFORDABILITY AND OCCUPANCY COVENANTS 2.1 Occupancy Requirements. (a) Extremely Low Income Units. During the HOME Term Borrower shall cause two (2) Units to be rented to and occupied by or, if vacant, available for occupancy by, Extremely Low Income Households. The two (2) Extremely Low Income Units are both HOME-Assisted Units and CDBG-Assisted Units. (b) Forty Percent Income Units. During the HOME Term Borrower shall cause seven (7) Units to be rented to and occupied by or, if vacant, available for occupancy by, Forty Percent Income Households. The seven (7) Forty Percent Income Units are both HOME- Assisted Units and CDBG-Assisted Units. (c) Very Low Income Units. During the HOME Term Borrower shall cause twenty (20) Units to be rented to and occupied by or, if vacant, available for occupancy by, Very Low Income Households. The twenty (20) Very Low Income Units are CDBG-Assisted Units, four (4) of which are also HOME-Assisted Units. (d) Intermingling of Units. Borrower shall cause the County-Assisted Units to be intermingled throughout the Development and of comparable quality to all other Units. All Tenants must have equal access to and enjoyment of all common facilities in the Development. The County-Assisted Units must be of the bedroom sizes set forth in the following chart: Extremely Low Income Units Forty Percent Income Units Very Low Income Units Two Bedroom 1 (CDBG-Assisted and HOME-Assisted) 2 (CDBG-Assisted and HOME-Assisted) 5 (5 CDBG-Assisted, 1 of which is also HOME- Assisted) Three Bedroom 1 (CDBG-Assisted and HOME-Assisted) 5 (CDBG-Assisted and HOME-Assisted) 15 (15 CDBG-Assisted, 3 of which are also HOME- Assisted) Total 2 7 20 (e) Disabled Persons Occupancy. (1) Borrower shall cause the Development to be operated at all times in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local disabled persons accessibility requirements including, but not limited to the applicable provisions of: (i) the Unruh Act, (ii) the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, (iii) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (iv) the United States Fair Housing Act, as amended, (v) the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, and (vi) Chapters 11A and 11B of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which relate to disabled persons access (collectively, the "Accessibility Requirements"). 8 863\104\3601415.2 (2) Borrower shall indemnify, protect, hold harmless and defend (with counsel reasonably satisfactory to the County) the County, and its board members, officers and employees, from all suits, actions, claims, causes of action, costs, demands, judgments and liens arising out of Borrower's failure to comply with the Accessibility Requirements. This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, repayment of the County Loan and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. (f) Existing Tenants. Borrower shall provide the County a written report of the income and rent amount of all Existing Tenants within thirty (30) days of date of the recordation of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. Concurrent with providing the report to the County, Borrower shall also provide a proposal regarding designation of Units as Extremely Low Income Units, Forty Percent Income Units, and Very Low Income Units. Borrower shall not implement any rent increases for Existing Tenants upon recordation of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement without the approval of the County. Any Rent increase is subject to Section 2.3 below. Any Existing Tenant lawfully residing in the Development as of the date of this Agreement is entitled to remain a resident of the Development even if such Tenant does not meet the income and other eligibility criteria of this Section 2.1. If and when such non-qualifying Existing Tenant voluntarily vacates the Unit, Borrower shall rent such Unit to an Extremely Low Income Household, Forty Percent Income Household, or Very Low Income Household, as necessary to meet the provisions of this Section. (g) HOME-Assisted Unit Compliance Deadline. Each HOME-Assisted Unit must be rented to and occupied by a HOME Eligible Household as set forth in Subsections (a), (b) and (c) above, on or before the date that occurs eighteen (18) months after the Completion Date. If Borrower fails to comply with this requirement, Borrower shall repay a portion of the Loan, with interest, in accordance with Section 2.8(c) of the Loan Agreement. 2.2 Allowable Rent. (a) Extremely Low Income Rent. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 below, the Rent paid by Tenants of Extremely Low Income Units may not exceed the Extremely Low Income Rent. (b) Forty Percent Income Rent. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 below, the Rent paid by Tenants of Forty Percent Income Units may not exceed the Forty Percent Income Rent. (c) Very Low Income Rent. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 below, the Rent paid by Tenants of Very Low Income Units may not exceed the Low HOME Rent. (d) No Additional Fees. Borrower may not charge any fee, other than Rent, to any Tenant of the County-Assisted Units for any housing or other services provided by Borrower. 9 863\104\3601415.2 2.3 Rent Increases. (a) Rent Amount. The initial Rent for all County-Assisted Units must be approved by the County prior to occupancy. The County will provide Borrower with a schedule of maximum permissible Rents for the County-Assisted Units and the maximum monthly allowances for utilities and services (excluding telephone) annually. (b) Rent Increases. All Rent increases for all County-Assisted Units are subject to County approval. No later than sixty (60) days prior to the proposed implementation of any Rent increase affecting a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower shall submit to the County a schedule of any proposed increase in the Rent charged for County-Assisted Units. The Rent for such Units may be increased no more than once annually (i.e. once every 12 months) based upon the annual income certification described in Article 3. The County will disapprove a Rent increase if it violates the schedule of maximum permissible Rents for the County-Assisted Units provided to Borrower by the County, or is greater than a 5% increase over the previous year's Rent, provided that the County may approve a request from Borrower for a rent increase greater than 5%, with a written explanation for the request from Borrower. Borrower shall give Tenants written notice at least thirty (30) days prior to any Rent increase, following completion of the County approval process set forth above. 2.4 Increased Income of Tenants. (a) Increased Income above Extremely Low Income but at or below Forty Percent Income. Subject to Section 2.3 above, if, upon the annual certification of the income of a Tenant of a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the income of the Tenant has increased above the qualifying limit for an Extremely Low Income Household, but not above the qualifying income for a Forty Percent Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit and the Tenant's Rent will remain at the Extremely Low Income Rent. Borrower shall then rent the next available Unit to an Extremely Low Income Household to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1(a) above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2(a). At the time that Borrower rents the next available unit to an Extremely Low Income Household, the Unit with the over-income Tenant may be re-designated as a Forty Percent Income Unit, or a Very Low Income Unit as applicable, consistent with the current income level of the Tenant, and as necessary to comply with the Unit mix requirements of Section 2.1 above. At the time of such re-designation, the over-income Tenant's Rent may be increased to match the new income designation, subject to Section 2.3 above. (b) Increased Income above Forty Percent Income but at or below Very Low Income. If, upon the annual certification of the income of a Tenant of a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the income of the Tenant has increased above the qualifying limit for a Forty Percent Income Household, but not above the qualifying income for a Very Low Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit and the Tenant's Rent will remain at the Forty Percent Income Rent. Borrower shall then rent the next available Unit to a Forty Percent Income Household to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1(b) above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2(b). At the time that Borrower rents the next available unit to a Forty Percent Income Household, the Unit with the over-income Tenant may be re-designated as a Very Low Income Unit, and at the time of such re-designation, the 10 863\104\3601415.2 over-income Tenant's Rent may be increased to match the new income designation, subject to Section 2.3 above. (c) Increased Income above Very Low Income but at or below Low Income. If, upon the annual certification of the income of a Tenant of a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the income of the Tenant has increased above the qualifying limit for a Very Low Income Household, but not above the qualifying income for a Low Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit and the Tenant's Rent will remain at the Low HOME Rent. Borrower shall then rent the next available Unit to a Very Low Income Household to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1(c) above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2(c). At the time that Borrower rents the next available unit to a Very Low Income Household, the over-income Tenant's Rent may be increased to the High HOME Rent. (d) Non-Qualifying Household. If, upon the annual certification of the income a Tenant of a County-Assisted Unit, Borrower determines that the Tenant’s income has increased above the qualifying limit for a Low Income Household, the Tenant may continue to occupy the Unit. Upon the expiration of such Tenant's lease, Borrower shall: (1) With 60 days’ advance written notice, increase such Tenant’s Rent to the lesser of (i) one-twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30%) of the actual Adjusted Income of the Tenant, and (ii) the fair market rent (subject to 24 C.F.R. 92.252(i)(2) regarding low income housing tax credit requirements), and (2) Rent the next available Unit to an Extremely Low Income Household, Forty Percent Income Household, or Very Low Income Household as applicable, to comply with the requirements of Section 2.1 above, at a Rent not exceeding the maximum Rent specified in Section 2.2, or designate another comparable Unit that is occupied by an Extremely Low Income Household, Forty Percent Income Household, or Very Low Income Household, as applicable, as a County-Assisted Unit, to meet the requirements of Section 2.1 above. (e) Termination of Occupancy. Upon termination of occupancy of a County- Assisted Unit by a Tenant, such Unit will be deemed to be continuously occupied by a household of the same income level as the initial income level of the vacating Tenant, until such unit is reoccupied, at which time categorization of the Unit will be established based on the occupancy requirements of Section 2.1. 2.5 Loss of Subsidy. (a) It is anticipated that certain Units in the Development (the "Subsidy Units") will receive Project-Based Section 8 or other rental subsidy payments (the "Rental Subsidy") throughout the HOME Term, as reflected in the Approved Development Budget. Notwithstanding Section 2.3(b), if any change in federal law occurs, or any action (or inaction) by Congress or any federal or State agency occurs, which results in a reduction, termination or nonrenewal of the Rental Subsidy through no fault of the Borrower, such that the Rental Subsidy shown on the Approved Development Budget is no longer available, Borrower may increase the 11 863\104\3601415.2 Rent on one or more of the County-Assisted Units that overlap with a Subsidy Unit, to the Low HOME Rent and/or High HOME Rent as applicable, subject to the following requirements: (1) At the time Borrower requests an increase in the Rent, Borrower shall provide the County with an operating budget for the Development for the County's approval pursuant to Section 4.4 of the Loan Agreement, showing the impact of the loss or reduction of the Rental Subsidy (the "Operating Budget"); (2) The number of County-Assisted Units subject to the Rent increase and the level of rent increase (i.e., Low HOME Rent or High HOME Rent) may not be greater than the amount required to ensure that the Development generates sufficient income to cover its operating costs and debt service as shown on the Operating Budget, and as is necessary to maintain the financial stability of the Development; (3) The Rent of at least three (3) of the HOME-Assisted Units may not exceed the Low HOME Rent; (4) Borrower shall use good faith efforts to ensure that the Tenants whose Rents are increased to the High HOME Rent have the highest incomes of the Tenants occupying the County-Assisted Units; and (5) Any such Rent increase must be pursuant to a transition plan approved by the County, consistent with remedial measures set forth in California Code of Regulations Title 4, Division 17, Chapter 1, Section 10337(a)(3) or successor regulation applicable to California's Federal and State Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. (b) Borrower shall use good faith efforts to obtain alternative sources of rental subsidies and shall provide the County with annual progress reports on efforts to obtain alternative sources of rental subsidies that would allow the rents on the County-Assisted Units to be reduced back to the Extremely Low Income Rent, Forty Percent Income Rent or Low HOME Rent as applicable. Upon receipt of any alternative rental subsidies, Borrower shall reduce the rents on the County-Assisted Units back to the Extremely Low Income Rent, Forty Percent Income Rent, or Low HOME Rent, as applicable, to the extent that the alternative rental subsidies provide sufficient income to cover the operating costs and debt service of the Development as shown on the Operating Budget. ARTICLE 3 INCOME CERTIFICATION; REPORTING; RECORDS 3.1 Income Certification. Borrower shall obtain, complete, and maintain on file, within sixty (60) days before expected occupancy and annually thereafter, income certifications from each Tenant renting any of the County-Assisted Units. Borrower shall make a good faith effort to verify the accuracy of the income provided by the applicant or occupying household, as the case may be, in an income certification. To verify the information, Borrower shall take two or more of the following steps: (i) obtain a pay stub for the most recent pay period; (ii) obtain an income tax return for the most recent tax year; (iii) conduct a credit agency or similar search; (iv) obtain an income verification form from the applicant's current employer; (v) obtain an income 12 863\104\3601415.2 verification form from the Social Security Administration and/or the California Department of Social Services if the applicant receives assistance from either of such agencies; or (vi) if the applicant is unemployed and does not have a tax return, obtain another form of independent verification. Where applicable, Borrower shall examine at least two (2) months of relevant source documentation. Copies of Tenant income certifications are to be available to the County upon request. 3.2 Reporting Requirements. (a) Borrower shall submit to the County within one hundred eighty (180) days after the Completion Date, and not later than forty-five (45) days after the close of each calendar year, or such other date as may be requested by the County, a report that includes the following data for each Unit and specifically identifies which Units are County-Assisted Units: (i) Tenant income, (ii) the number of occupants, (iii) the Rent, (iv) the number of bedrooms, and (v) the initial address of each Tenant. To demonstrate continued compliance with Section 2.1 Borrower shall cause each annual report after the initial report to include a record of any subsequent Tenant substitutions and any vacancies in County-Assisted Units that have been filled. (b) Borrower shall submit to the County within forty-five (45) days after receipt of a written request, or such other time agreed to by the County, any other information or completed forms requested by the County in order to comply with reporting requirements of HUD, the State of California, and the County. 3.3 Tenant Records. Borrower shall maintain complete, accurate and current records pertaining to income and household size of Tenants. All Tenant lists, applications and waiting lists relating to the Development are to be at all times: (i) separate and identifiable from any other business of Borrower, (ii) maintained as required by the County, in a reasonable condition for proper audit, and (iii) subject to examination during business hours by representatives of the County. Borrower shall retain copies of all materials obtained or produced with respect to occupancy of the Units for a period of at least five (5) years. The County may examine and make copies of all books, records or other documents of Borrower that pertain to the Development. 3.4 Development Records. (a) Borrower shall keep and maintain at the principal place of business of the Borrower set forth in Section 6.11 below, or elsewhere with the County's written consent, full, complete and appropriate books, records and accounts relating to the Development. Borrower shall cause all books, records and accounts relating to its compliance with the terms, provisions, covenants and conditions of the Loan Documents to be kept and maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied, and to be consistent with requirements of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. Borrower shall cause all books, records, and accounts to be open to and available for inspection and copying by HUD, the County, its auditors or other authorized representatives at reasonable intervals during normal business hours. Borrower shall cause copies of all tax returns and other reports that Borrower may be required to furnish to any government agency to be open for inspection by the County at all reasonable times at the place that the books, records and accounts of Borrower are kept. Borrower shall preserve such records for a period of not less than five (5) years after their 13 863\104\3601415.2 creation in compliance with all HUD records and accounting requirements. If any litigation, claim, negotiation, audit exception, monitoring, inspection or other action relating to the use of the County Loan is pending at the end of the record retention period stated herein, then Borrower shall retain the records until such action and all related issues are resolved. Borrower shall cause the records to include all invoices, receipts, and other documents related to expenditures from the County Loan funds. Borrower shall cause records to be accurate and current and in a form that allows the County to comply with the record keeping requirements contained in 24 C.F.R. 92.508 and 24 C.F.R. 570.506. Such records are to include but are not limited to: (1) Records providing a full description of the activities undertaken with the use of the County Loan funds; (2) Records demonstrating the eligibility of activities under the CDBG regulations set forth in 24 C.F.R. 570 et seq., and that use of the CDBG Funds meets one of the national objectives of the CDBG program set forth in 24 C.F.R. Section 570.208; (3) Records demonstrating compliance with the HUD property standards and lead-based paint requirements and the maintenance requirements set forth in Section 5.6 (which implements 24 C.F.R. 92.251); (4) Records documenting compliance with the fair housing, equal opportunity, and affirmative fair marketing requirements; (5) Financial records as required by 24 C.F.R. 92.505, 24 C.F.R. 570.502, and 2 C.F.R. Part 200; (6) Records demonstrating compliance with the HOME and CDBG marketing, tenant selection, affordability, and income requirements; (7) Records demonstrating compliance with MBE/WBE requirements; (8) Records demonstrating compliance with 24 C.F.R. Part 135 which implements Section 3 of the Housing Development Act of 1968; (9) Records demonstrating compliance with applicable relocation requirements, which must be retained for at least five (5) years after the date by which persons displaced from the property have received final payments; and (10) Records demonstrating compliance with labor requirements including certified payrolls from Borrower's general contractor evidencing that applicable prevailing wages have been paid. (b) The County shall notify Borrower of any records it deems insufficient. Borrower has fifteen (15) calendar days after the receipt of such a notice to correct any deficiency in the records specified by the County in such notice, or if a period longer than fifteen (15) days is reasonably necessary to correct the deficiency, then Borrower must begin to correct the deficiency within fifteen (15) days and correct the deficiency as soon as reasonably possible. 14 863\104\3601415.2 ARTICLE 4 OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT 4.1 Residential Use. Borrower shall operate the Development for residential use only. No part of the Development may be operated as transient housing. 4.2 Compliance with Loan Documents and Regulatory Requirements. (a) Borrower's actions with respect to the Property shall at all times be in full conformity with: (i) all requirements of the Loan Documents; (ii) all requirements imposed on projects assisted with HOME Funds as contained in 42 U.S.C. Section 12701, et seq., 24 C.F.R. Part 92, and other implementing rules and regulations; (iii) all requirements imposed on projects assisted with CDBG Funds as contained in 42 U.S.C. 5301, et seq., 24 C.F.R. Part 570, and other implementing rules and regulations; and (iii) any other regulatory requirements imposed on the Development including but not limited to regulatory agreements associated with the Low Income Housing Tax Credits provided by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, regulatory agreements associated with financing and subsidies provided by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and rental subsidies provided to the Development (the "Development Regulatory Documents"). (b) Borrower shall promptly notify the County in writing of the existence of any default under any Development Regulatory Documents, and provide the County copies of any such notice of default. 4.3 Marketing Plan; Tenant Selection Plan; Technology Plan. (a) Marketing Plan. (1) No later than six (6) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County for approval its plan for marketing the Development to income-eligible households as required by this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement (the "Marketing Plan"). The Marketing Plan must include information on affirmative marketing efforts and compliance with fair housing laws and 24 C.F.R. 92.351(a). (2) Upon receipt of the Marketing Plan, the County will promptly review the Marketing Plan and will approve or disapprove it within fifteen (15) days after receipt. If the Marketing Plan is not approved, the County will give Borrower specific reasons for such disapproval and Borrower shall submit a revised Marketing Plan within fifteen (15) days of notification of the County's disapproval. Borrower shall follow this procedure for resubmission of a revised Marketing Plan until the Marketing Plan is approved by the County. If the Borrower does not submit a revised Marketing Plan that is approved by the County at least three (3) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower will be in default of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (3) If any HOME-Assisted Units have not been rented in accordance with Section 2.1 above on or before the date that is five (5) months after the 15 863\104\3601415.2 Completion Date Borrower shall submit to the County a detailed report of ongoing marketing efforts, and if deemed appropriate by the County, any necessary amendments or updates to the Marketing Plan to cause the vacant HOME-Assisted Units to be rented in compliance with Section 2.1. (4) If any HOME-Assisted Units have not been rented to in accordance with Section 2.1 above on or before the date that is twelve (12) months after the Completion Date Borrower shall submit to the County a detailed report of ongoing marketing efforts, and if deemed appropriate by the County, any necessary amendments or updates to the Marketing Plan to cause the vacant HOME-Assisted Units to be rented in compliance with Section 2.1. (b) Tenant Selection Plan. (1) No later than six (6) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County, for its review and approval, Borrower's written tenant selection plan (the "Tenant Selection Plan"). Borrower's Tenant Selection Plan must, at a minimum, meet the requirements for tenant selection set out in 24 C.F.R. 92.253(d), and any modifications thereto. (2) Upon receipt of the Tenant Selection Plan, the County will promptly review the Tenant Selection Plan and will approve or disapprove it within fifteen (15) days after receipt. If the Tenant Selection Plan is not approved, the County will give Borrower specific reasons for such disapproval and Borrower shall submit a revised Tenant Selection Plan within fifteen (15) days of notification of the County's disapproval. Borrower shall follow this procedure for resubmission of a revised Tenant Selection Plan until the Tenant Selection Plan is approved by the County. If the Borrower does not submit a revised Tenant Selection Plan that is approved by the County at least three (3) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower will be in default of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (c) Technology Plan. (1) No later than six (6) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County, for its review and approval, Borrower's written plan describing the broadband services at the Development (the "Technology Plan"). Broadband means: cables, fiber optics, wiring, or other permanent (integral to the structure) infrastructure, including wireless infrastructure, that is capable of providing access to internet connections in individual housing units. (2) Upon receipt of the Technology Plan, the County will promptly review the Technology Plan and will approve or disapprove it within fifteen (15) days after receipt. If the Technology Plan is not approved, the County will give Borrower specific reasons for such disapproval and Borrower shall submit a revised Technology Plan within fifteen (15) days of notification of the County's disapproval. Borrower shall follow this procedure for resubmission of a revised Technology Plan until the Technology Plan is approved by the County. If the Borrower does not submit a revised Technology Plan that is approved by the County at 16 863\104\3601415.2 least three (3) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower will be in default of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. 4.4 Lease Provisions. (a) No later than four (4) months prior to the date rehabilitation of the Development is projected to be complete, Borrower shall submit to the County for approval Borrower’s proposed form of lease agreement for the County's review and approval. When leasing Units within the Development, Borrower shall use the form of lease approved by the County. Borrower may not permit the lease to contain any provision that is prohibited by 24 C.F.R. Section 92.253(b) and any amendments thereto. Borrower’s form of lease must include any provisions necessary to comply with the requirements of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113–4, 127 Stat. 54) applicable to HUD-funded programs. The form of lease must comply with all requirements of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, the other Loan Documents and must, among other matters: (1) provide for termination of the lease for failure to: (i) provide any information required under this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement or reasonably requested by Borrower to establish or recertify the Tenant's qualification, or the qualification of the Tenant's household, for occupancy in the Development in accordance with the standards set forth in this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, or (ii) qualify as an Extremely Low Income Household, Forty Percent Income Household, or a Very Low Income Household, as applicable, as a result of any material misrepresentation made by such Tenant with respect to the income computation; (2) be for an initial term of not less than one (1) year, unless by mutual agreement between the Tenant and Borrower, and provide for no increase in Rent during such year. After the initial year of tenancy, the lease may be month-to-month by mutual agreement of Borrower and the Tenant. Notwithstanding the above, any rent increases are subject to the requirements of Section 2.3 above; and (3) include a provision that requires a Tenant who is residing in a Unit required to be accessible pursuant to Section 3.9(b) of the Loan Agreement, and who is not in need of an accessible Unit to move to a non-accessible Unit when a non-accessible Unit becomes available and another Tenant or prospective Tenant is in need of an accessible Unit. (b) During the HOME Term, Borrower shall comply with the Marketing Plan and Tenant Selection Plan approved by the County. 4.5 Lease Termination. Any termination of a lease or refusal to renew a lease for a County-Assisted Unit within the Development must be in conformance with 24 C.F.R. 92.253(c) and the requirements of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 ((Pub. L. 113–4, 127 Stat. 54) applicable to HUD-funded programs, and must be preceded by not less than thirty (30) days written notice to the Tenant by Borrower specifying the grounds for the action. 17 863\104\3601415.2 4.6 HOME and CDBG Requirements. (a) During the HOME Term Borrower shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing the use of the HOME Funds as set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 92 and use of the CDBG Funds as set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 570. In the event of any conflict between this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement and applicable laws and regulations governing the use of the County Loan funds, the applicable laws and regulations govern. (b) The laws and regulations governing the use of the County Loan funds include (but are not limited to) the following: (1) Environmental and Historic Preservation. 24 C.F.R. Part 58, which prescribes procedures for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4361), and the additional laws and authorities listed at 24 C.F.R. 58.5; (2) Applicability of Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. The applicable policies, guidelines, and requirements of 2 C.F.R. Part 200; 24 C.F.R. 92.505; and 24 C.F.R. 570.502; (3) Debarred, Suspended or Ineligible Contractors. The prohibition on the use of debarred, suspended, or ineligible contractors set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 24; (4) Civil Rights, Housing and Community Development, and Age Discrimination Acts. The Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 100; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 as amended; Section 104(b) and Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 as amended; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 USC 794, et seq.); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 USC 6101, et seq.); Executive Order 11063 as amended by Executive Order 12259 and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 107; Executive Order 11246 as amended by Executive Orders 11375, 12086, 11478, 12107; Executive Order 11625 as amended by Executive Order 12007; Executive Order 12432; Executive Order 12138 as amended by Executive Order 12608; (5) Lead-Based Paint. The requirement of the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4821 et seq.), the Residential Lead- Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act (42 U.S.C. 4851 et seq.), and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 35; (6) Relocation. The requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), and implementing regulations at 49 C.F.R. Part 24; Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. 42 et seq. (if applicable); and 24 C.F.R. 92.353; 24 C.F.R. 570.606; and California Government Code Section 7260 et seq. and implementing regulations at 25 California Code of Regulations Sections 6000 et seq.; (7) Discrimination against the Disabled. The requirements of the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 18 863\104\3601415.2 100; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794), and federal regulations issued pursuant thereto, which prohibit discrimination against the disabled in any federally assisted program, the requirements of the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4151- 4157) and the applicable requirements of Title II and/or Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12131 et seq.), and federal regulations issued pursuant thereto; (8) Clean Air and Water Acts. The Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., and the regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency with respect thereto, at 40 C.F.R. Part 1500, as amended from time to time; (9) Training Opportunities. The requirements of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, 12 U.S.C. 1701u and implementing Regulations at 24 C.F.R. 75 ("Section 3"); (i) Pursuant to Section 3, to the greatest extent feasible, and consistent with existing Federal, state, and local laws and regulations Borrower shall ensure: (A) that employment and training opportunities arising in connection with the Development are provided to Section 3 workers within the metropolitan area (or nonmetropolitan county) in which the Development is located. Where feasible, priority for opportunities and training described above should be given to: (i) Section 3 workers residing within the service area or the neighborhood of the project, and (ii) participants in YouthBuild programs; and (B) that contracts for work awarded in connection with the Development are provided to business concerns that provide economic opportunities to Section 3 workers residing within the metropolitan area (or nonmetropolitan county) in which the Development is located. Where feasible, priority for opportunities and training described above should be given to: (i) Section 3 business concerns that provide economic opportunities to Section 3 workers residing within the service area or the neighborhood of the Development, and (ii) participants in YouthBuild programs. (ii) Borrower will be considered to have complied with the Section 3 requirements, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, if it certifies that it has followed the prioritization of effort set forth in subsection (i) above, and meets or exceeds the applicable Section 3 benchmark as described in 24 C.F.R. 75.23(b). (iii) Borrower shall maintain records of its Section 3 activities and cause such records to be accurate and current and in a form that allows the County to comply with the reporting requirements of 24 C.F.R. 75.25. (iv) Borrower shall require all contractors and subcontractors performing work on the Development to comply with the Section 3 requirements. 19 863\104\3601415.2 (10) Labor Standards. The labor requirements set forth in 24 C.F.R. 92.354 and 24 C.F.R. Section 570.603; the prevailing wage requirements of the Davis- Bacon Act and implementing rules and regulations (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148); the Copeland "Anti- Kickback" Act (40 U.S.C. 276(c)) which requires that workers be paid at least once a week without any deductions or rebates except permissible deductions; the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act – CWHSSA (40 U.S.C. 3701-3708) which requires that workers receive "overtime" compensation at a rate of 1-1/2 times their regular hourly wage after they have worked forty (40) hours in one (1) week; and Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A, Parts 1, 3 and 5 are the regulations and procedures issued by the Secretary of Labor for the administration and enforcement of the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended; (11) Drug Free Workplace. The requirements of the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-690) and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 24; (12) Anti-Lobbying; Disclosure Requirements. The disclosure requirements and prohibitions of 31 U.S.C. 1352 and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 87; (13) Historic Preservation. The historic preservation requirements set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. Section 470) and the procedures set forth in 36 C.F.R. Part 800. If archeological, cultural, or historic period resources are discovered during construction, all construction work must come to a halt and Borrower shall immediately notify the County. Borrower shall not shall alter or move the discovered material(s) until all appropriate procedures for "post-review discoveries" set forth in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act have taken place, which include, but are not limited to, consultation with the California State Historic Preservation Officer and evaluation of the discovered material(s) by a qualified professional archeologist; (14) Flood Disaster Protection. The requirements of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) (the "Flood Act"). No portion of the assistance provided under this Agreement is approved for acquisition or construction purposes as defined under Section 3(a) of the Flood Act, for use in an area identified by HUD as having special flood hazards which is not then in compliance with the requirements for participation in the national flood insurance program pursuant to Section 201(d) of the Flood Act. The use of any assistance provided under this Agreement for such acquisition or construction in such identified areas in communities then participating in the National Flood Insurance Program is subject to the mandatory purchase of flood insurance requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Act. If the Property is located in an area identified by HUD as having special flood hazards and in which the sale of flood insurance has been made available under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., the property owner and its successors or assigns must obtain and maintain, during the ownership of the Property, such flood insurance as required with respect to financial assistance for acquisition or construction purposes under -Section 102(s) of the Flood Act. Such provisions are required notwithstanding the fact that the construction on the Property is not itself funded with assistance provided under this Agreement; (15) Religious Organizations. If the Borrower is a religious organization, as defined by the CDBG and/or HOME requirements, the Borrower shall comply 20 863\104\3601415.2 with all conditions prescribed by HUD for the use of HOME Funds and CDBG Funds by religious organizations, including the First Amendment of the United States Constitution regarding church/state principles and the applicable constitutional prohibitions set forth in 24 C.F.R. 92.257 and 24 C.F.R. 570.200(j); (16) Violence Against Women. The requirements of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113–4, 127 Stat. 54) applicable to HUD-funded programs; (17) Conflict of Interest. The conflict of interest provisions set forth in 24 C.F.R. 92.356 and 24 C.F.R. 570.611; and (18) HUD Regulations. Any other HUD regulations present or as may be amended, added, or waived in the future pertaining to the County Loan funds. ARTICLE 5 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE 5.1 Management Responsibilities. Borrower is responsible for all management functions with respect to the Development, including without limitation the selection of Tenants, certification and recertification of household size and income, evictions, collection of rents and deposits, maintenance, landscaping, routine and extraordinary repairs, replacement of capital items, and security. The County has no responsibility for management of the Development. Borrower shall retain a professional property management company approved by the County in its reasonable discretion to perform Borrower's management duties hereunder. An on-site property management representative is required to reside at the Property. 5.2 Management Agent. Borrower shall cause the Development to be managed by an experienced management agent reasonably acceptable to the County, with a demonstrated ability to operate residential facilities like the Development in a manner that will provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing (the "Management Agent"). The County has approved Community Property Management Corporation as the Management Agent. Borrower shall submit for the County's approval the identity of any proposed subsequent management agent. Borrower shall also submit such additional information about the background, experience and financial condition of any proposed management agent as is reasonably necessary for the County to determine whether the proposed management agent meets the standard for a qualified management agent set forth above. If the proposed management agent meets the standard for a qualified management agent set forth above, the County shall approve the proposed management agent by notifying Borrower in writing. Unless the proposed management agent is disapproved by the County within thirty (30) days, which disapproval is to state with reasonable specificity the basis for disapproval, it shall be deemed approved. 5.3 Periodic Performance Review. The County reserves the right to conduct an annual (or more frequently, if deemed necessary by the County) review of the management practices and financial status of the Development. The purpose of each periodic review will be to enable the County to determine if the Development is being operated and managed in 21 863\104\3601415.2 accordance with the requirements and standards of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. Borrower shall cooperate with the County in such reviews. 5.4 Replacement of Management Agent. If, as a result of a periodic review, the County determines in its reasonable judgment that the Development is not being operated and managed in accordance with any of the material requirements and standards of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, the County shall deliver notice to Borrower of its intention to cause replacement of the Management Agent, including the reasons therefor. Within fifteen (15) days after receipt by Borrower of such written notice, the County staff and Borrower shall meet in good faith to consider methods for improving the financial and operating status of the Development, including, without limitation, replacement of the Management Agent. If, after such meeting, County staff recommends in writing the replacement of the Management Agent, Borrower shall promptly dismiss the then-current Management Agent, and shall appoint as the Management Agent a person or entity meeting the standards for a management agent set forth in Section 5.2 above and approved by the County pursuant to Section 5.2 above. Any contract for the operation or management of the Development entered into by Borrower shall provide that the Management Agent may be dismissed and the contract terminated as set forth above. Failure to remove the Management Agent in accordance with the provisions of this Section constitutes a default under this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and the County may enforce this provision through legal proceedings as specified in Section 6.5 below. 5.5 Approval of Management Policies. Borrower shall submit its written management policies with respect to the Development to the County for its review, and shall amend such policies in any way necessary to ensure that such policies comply with the provisions of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. 5.6 Property Maintenance. (a) Borrower shall maintain, for the entire HOME Term of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, all interior and exterior improvements, including landscaping: (i) in decent, safe and sanitary condition, (ii) in good condition and repair, and (iii) free of all health and safety defects. Such maintenance must be in accordance with: (i) 24 C.F.R. Section 92.251, (ii) the lead-based paint requirements in 24 C.F.R. part 35, (iii) all applicable laws, rules, ordinances, orders and regulations of all federal, state, county, municipal, and other governmental agencies and bodies having or claiming jurisdiction and all their respective departments, bureaus, and officials, (iv) the Minimum Multifamily Rehabilitation Standard published by the County on March 2017 and available on the County's website at https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/4881/Developing-Affordable-Housing; and (v) any other standards provided by the County (collectively, the "Maintenance Standards"). Borrower shall correct any life-threatening maintenance deficiencies, including those set forth in the Maintenance Standards immediately upon notification. 22 863\104\3601415.2 (b) At the beginning of each year of the HOME Term, Borrower shall certify to the County that the Development is in compliance with the Maintenance Standards. 5.7 Property Inspections. (a) On-Site Physical Inspections. The County will perform on-site inspections of the Development during the HOME Term to ensure compliance with the Maintenance Standards. The County will perform an on-site inspection within twelve months after completion of rehabilitation of the Development and at least once every three (3) years during the HOME Term. If the Development is found to have health and safety violations, the County may perform more frequent inspections. Borrower shall cooperate in such inspections. (b) Violation of Maintenance Standards. If after an inspection, the County determines that Borrower is in violation of the Maintenance Standards, the County will provide Borrower a written report of the violations. Borrower shall correct the violations set forth in the report provided to Borrower by County. The County will perform a follow-up inspection to verify that the violations have been corrected. If such violations continue for a period of ten (10) days after delivery of the report to Borrower by the County with respect to graffiti, debris, waste material, and general maintenance, or thirty (30) days after delivery of the report to Borrower by the County with respect to landscaping and building improvements, then the County, in addition to whatever other remedy it may have at law or in equity, has the right to enter upon the Property and perform or cause to be performed all such acts and work necessary to cure the violation. Pursuant to such right of entry, the County is permitted (but is not required) to enter upon the Property and to perform all acts and work necessary to protect, maintain, and preserve the improvements and landscaped areas on the Property, and to attach a lien on the Property, or to assess the Property, in the amount of the expenditures arising from such acts and work of protection, maintenance, and preservation by the County and/or costs of such cure, which amount Borrower shall promptly pay to the County upon demand. ARTICLE 6 MISCELLANEOUS 6.1 Transfers. (a) For purposes of this Agreement, "Transfer" means any sale, assignment, or transfer, whether voluntary or involuntary, of: (i) any rights and/or duties under the Loan Documents; and/or (ii) any interest in the Development and/or Borrower, including (but not limited to) a fee simple interest, a joint tenancy interest, a life estate, a partnership interest, a leasehold interest, a security interest, or an interest evidenced by a land contract by which possession of the Development is transferred and Borrower retains title. The term "Transfer" excludes the leasing of any single unit in the Development to an occupant in compliance with this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. The County Director – Department of Conservation and Development is authorized to execute assignment and assumption agreements on behalf of the County to implement any approved Transfer. 23 863\104\3601415.2 (b) Except as otherwise permitted in this Section 6.1, no Transfer is permitted without the prior written consent of the County, which the County may withhold in its sole discretion. The County Loan will automatically accelerate and be due in full upon any Transfer made without the prior written consent of the County. (c) The County hereby approves the grant of the security interests in the Development for Approved Financing as such term is defined in Section 1.1(g) of the Loan Agreement. 6.2 Nondiscrimination. (a) All of the Units must be available for occupancy on a continuous basis to members of the general public who are income eligible. Borrower may not give preference to any particular class or group of persons in renting or selling the Units, except to the extent that the Units are required to be leased to income eligible households pursuant to this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement or any Development Regulatory Document. Borrower herein covenants by and for Borrower, assigns, and all persons claiming under or through Borrower, that there exist no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), ancestry, age, familial status (except for lawful senior housing in accordance with state and federal law), or disability, in the leasing, subleasing, transferring, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of any unit nor will Borrower or any person claiming under or through Borrower, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use, or occupancy, of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants, or vendees of any unit or in connection with the employment of persons for the construction, operation and management of any unit. (b) Borrower shall accept as Tenants, on the same basis as all other prospective Tenants, persons who are recipients of federal certificates for rent subsidies pursuant to the existing housing program under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act, or its successor. Borrower may not apply selection criteria to Section 8 certificate or voucher holders that is more burdensome than criteria applied to all other prospective Tenants, nor will Borrower apply or permit the application of management policies or lease provisions with respect to the Development which have the effect of precluding occupancy of units by such prospective Tenants. 6.3 Application of Provisions. The provisions of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement apply to the Property for the entire HOME Term even if the County Loan is paid in full prior to the end of the HOME Term. This HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement binds any successor, heir or assign of Borrower, whether a change in interest occurs voluntarily or involuntarily, by operation of law or otherwise, except as expressly released by the County. The County is making the County Loan on the condition, and in consideration of, this provision, and would not do so otherwise. 6.4 Covenants to Run With the Land. The County and Borrower hereby declare their express intent that the covenants and restrictions set forth in this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement run with the land, and bind all successors in title to the Property, provided, however, 24 863\104\3601415.2 that on the expiration of the HOME Term said covenants and restrictions expire. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereafter executed covering or conveying the Property or any portion thereof, is to be held conclusively to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants and restrictions, regardless of whether such covenants or restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument, unless the County expressly releases such conveyed portion of the Property from the requirements of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. 6.5 Enforcement by the County. If Borrower fails to perform any obligation under this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and fails to cure the default within thirty (30) days after the County has notified Borrower in writing of the default, the County may enforce this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement by any or all of the following actions, or any other remedy provided by law: (a) Calling the County Loan. The County may declare a default under the Loan Documents, accelerate the indebtedness evidenced by the Loan Documents, and proceed with foreclosure under the Deed of Trust. (b) Action to Compel Performance or for Damages. The County may bring an action at law or in equity to compel Borrower's performance of its obligations under this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and may seek damages. (c) Remedies Provided Under Loan Documents. The County may exercise any other remedy provided under the Loan Documents. 6.6 Anti-Lobbying Certification. (a) Borrower certifies, to the best of Borrower's knowledge or belief, that: (1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of it, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement; (2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, it will complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying, in accordance with its instructions. (b) This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when the Loan Documents were made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into the Loan Documents imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be 25 863\104\3601415.2 subject to a civil penalty of not less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) and no more than One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) for such failure. 6.7 Recording and Filing. The County and Borrower shall cause this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and all amendments and supplements to it, to be recorded in the Official Records of the County of Contra Costa. 6.8 Governing Law. This HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of California. 6.9 Waiver of Requirements. Any of the requirements of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement may be expressly waived by the County in writing, but no waiver by the County of any requirement of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement extends to or affects any other provision of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and may not be deemed to do so. 6.10 Amendments. This HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument executed by all the parties hereto or their successors in title that is duly recorded in the official records of the County of Contra Costa. 6.11 Notices. Any notice requirement set forth herein will be deemed to be satisfied three (3) days after mailing of the notice first-class United States certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the appropriate party as follows: County: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Assistant Deputy Director Borrower: Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership c/o Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond 1535-A Fred Jackson Way Richmond, CA 94801 Attn: Executive Director Such addresses may be changed by notice to the other party given in the same manner as provided above. 6.12 Severability. If any provision of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining portions of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 6.13 Multiple Originals; Counterparts. This HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement may be executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and may be signed in counterparts. 26 863\104\3601415.2 6.14 Revival of Agreement after Foreclosure. In the event there is a foreclosure of the Property, this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will revive according to its original terms if, during the HOME Term, the owner of record before the foreclosure, or deed in lieu of foreclosure, or any entity that includes the former owner or those with whom the former owner has or had family or business ties, obtains an ownership interest in the Development or Property. 6.15 County Regulatory Agreement. The County and Borrower are entering into this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement concurrently with the County Regulatory Agreement. The County Regulatory Agreement as it applies to the County-Assisted Units will be in effect for fifty-five (55) years from the Completion Date which term overlaps with but is longer than the HOME Term. Compliance with the terms of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will be deemed compliance with the County Regulatory Agreement during the HOME Term as it applies to the HOME-Assisted Units. In the event of a conflict between this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement and the County Regulatory Agreement during the HOME Term as it applies to the HOME-Assisted Units, the terms of this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will prevail. [remainder of page intentionally left blank] [signatures on following pages] 27 Signature page HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement 863\104\3601415.2 WHEREAS, this HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement has been entered into by the undersigned as of the date first written above. COUNTY: COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California By: __________________ John Kopchik Director, Department of Conservation and Development Approved as to form: THOMAS L. GEIGER County Counsel By: Kathleen Andrus Deputy County Counsel BORROWER: CHESLEY AVENUE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP a California limited partnership By: Chesley Avenue LLC, a California limited liability company, its general partner By: Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, its sole member and manager By: ____________________________ Don Gilmore, Executive Director 863\104\3601415.2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. 863\104\3601415.2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. A-1 863\104\3601415.2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description The land referred to is situated in the County of Contra Costa, City of Richmond, State of California, and is described as follows: Lots 8 through 28, Block 210, Map of Walls Second Addition, filed March 4, 1912, Map Book 6, Page 140, Contra Costa County Records. APN: 561-251-003-1 1 863\104\3592078.4 DEVELOPMENT LOAN AGREEMENT Chesley Mutual Housing (HOME and CDBG Funds) This Development Loan Agreement (the "Agreement") is dated February 15, 2024 and is between the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), and Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("Borrower"). RECITALS A. Defined terms used but not defined in these recitals are as defined in Article 1 of this Agreement. B. The County has received Home Investment Partnerships Act ("HOME") funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") pursuant to the Cranston-Gonzales National Housing Act of 1990 ("HOME Funds"). The HOME Funds must be used by the County in accordance with 24 C.F.R. Part 92 (the "HOME Regulations"). C. The County has received Community Development Block Grant Program ("CDBG") funds from HUD under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 USC 5301, et seq.), as amended ("CDBG Funds"). The CDBG Funds must be used by the County in accordance with 24 C.F.R. Part 570. D. Borrower is the owner of the real property commonly known as 802 Chesley Avenue, located in the County of Contra Costa, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit A (the "Property"). Borrower intends to rehabilitate the thirty (30) multifamily housing units currently existing on the Property, of which twenty-nine (29) are for rental to extremely low and very low income households, and one (1) is a manager's unit (the "Development"). The Development, as well as all landscaping, roads and parking spaces on the Property and any additional improvements on the Property, are the "Improvements". E. Borrower desires to borrow from the County One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) of HOME Funds and Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($994,807) of CDBG Funds for a total loan of One Million Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,994,807) (the "Loan"). F. The Loan is evidenced by this Agreement, the Note, the Intercreditor Agreement, and the Regulatory Agreements, and is secured by the Deed of Trust. G. The Loan is being made to finance rehabilitation costs of the Development. Rehabilitation of the Development is intended to maintain the supply of affordable rental housing in Contra Costa County. Due to the assistance provided Borrower through the Loan, the County is designating twenty-nine (29) units as assisted with CDBG Funds (the "CDBG- Assisted Units") and thirteen (13) units as assisted with HOME Funds (the "HOME-Assisted Units"), which HOME-Assisted Units overlap with the CDBG-Assisted Units. 2 863\104\3592078.4 H. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) ("CEQA") the City determined the Development to be categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. I. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) ("NEPA"), the County has completed and approved all applicable environmental review for the activities proposed to be undertaken under this Agreement. The parties therefore agree as follows: AGREEMENT ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS Section 1.1 Definitions. The following terms have the following meanings: (a) "Accessibility Requirements" has the meaning set forth in Section 3.9 below. (b) "Agreement" means this Development Loan Agreement. (c) "Annual Operating Budget" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.4 below. (d) "Annual Operating Expenses" means for each calendar year, the following costs reasonably and actually incurred for operation and maintenance of the Development: (i) fees paid to the County as the issuer of County of Contra Costa Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Chesley Apartments) 2003, Series E and Series F; (ii) property taxes and assessments imposed on the Development; (iii) debt service currently due on a non-optional basis (excluding debt service due from residual receipts or surplus cash of the Development) on Approved Financing; (iv) on-site service provider fees for tenant social services, provided the County has approved, in writing, the plan and budget for such services before such services begin; (v) property management fees and reimbursements, on–site property management office expenses, and salaries of property management and maintenance personnel, not to exceed amounts that are standard in the industry and which are pursuant to a management contract approved by the County; (vi) the Partnership Management/Asset Fee; 3 863\104\3592078.4 (vii) fees for accounting, audit, and legal services incurred by Borrower's general partner in the asset management of the Development, not to exceed amounts that are standard in the industry, to the extent such fees are not included in the Partnership Management/Asset Fee; (viii) premiums for insurance required for the Improvements to satisfy the requirements of any lender of Approved Financing; (ix) utility services not paid for directly by tenants, including water, sewer, and trash collection; (x) maintenance and repair expenses and services; (xi) any annual license or certificate of occupancy fees required for operation of the Development; (xii) security services; (xiii) advertising and marketing; (xiv) cash deposited into the Replacement Reserve Account in the amount set forth in Section 4.2(a) below; (xv) cash deposited into the Operating Reserve Account to maintain the amount set forth in Section 4.2(b) below (excluding amounts deposited to initially capitalize the account); (xvi) extraordinary operating costs specifically approved in writing by the County; (xvii) payment of any deferred portion of Developer Fee (without interest), not to exceed the amount set forth in Section 3.18; (xviii) the HOME Monitoring Fee; and (xix) payments of deductibles in connection with casualty insurance claims not normally paid from reserves, the amount of uninsured losses actually replaced, repaired or restored, and not normally paid from reserves, and other ordinary and reasonable operating expenses approved in writing by the County and not listed above. Annual Operating Expenses do not include the following: depreciation, amortization, depletion or other non-cash expenses, initial deposits to capitalize a reserve account, any amount expended from a reserve account, and any capital cost associated with the Development. (e) "Annual Payment" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.8(a) below. (f) "Approved Development Budget" means the proforma development budget, including sources and uses of funds, as approved by the County, and attached hereto and 4 863\104\3592078.4 incorporated herein as Exhibit B. (g) "Approved Financing" means all of the following loans, grants, equity and subsidy obtained by Borrower and approved by the County for the purpose of financing the rehabilitation and operations of the Development: (i) loan from the Housing Trust Silicon Valley in the amount of Two Million Eight Hundred Twenty-Seven Thousand Ninety-Eight Dollars ($2,827,098) (the "HTSV Loan"); (ii) existing loan from the City in the amount of Two Hundred Twenty-Three Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($223,500) (the "City Loan"); and (iii) existing loan from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Richmond in the amount of Four Million Seven Hundred Forty-One Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-Two Dollars ($4,741,492) (the "City RDA Loan"). (h) "Bid Package" means the package of documents Borrower's general contractor is required to distribute to potential bidders as part of the process of selecting subcontractors for the Development. The Bid Package is to include the following: (i) an invitation to bid; (ii) a copy of the proposed construction contract; (iii) a form of bid guarantee that is reasonably acceptable to the County that guarantees, at a minimum, an amount equal to five percent (5%) of the bid price; and (iv) all Construction Plans. (i) "Borrower" has the meaning set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. (j) "CDBG" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (k) "CDBG-Assisted Units" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph G of the Recitals. (l) "CDBG Funds" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (m) "CEQA" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph H of the Recitals. (n) "City" means the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation. (o) "City Loan" has the meaning set forth in Section 1.1(g)(ii). (p) "City RDA Loan" has the meaning set forth in Section 1.1(g)(iii). (q) "Commencement of Construction" has the meaning set forth in Section 3.5. (r) "Completion Date" means the date a final certificate of occupancy, or equivalent document (such as a construction permit sign off for rehabilitation projects) is issued by the City to certify that the Development may be legally occupied. 5 863\104\3592078.4 (s) "Construction Plans" means all construction documentation upon which Borrower and Borrower's general contractor rely in rehabilitating all the Improvements on the Property (including the units in the Development, landscaping, parking, and common areas) and includes, but is not limited to, final architectural drawings, landscaping plans and specifications, final elevations, building plans and specifications (also known as "working drawings"). (t) "County" has the meaning set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. (u) "County-Assisted Units" means the CDBG-Assisted Units and the HOME-Assisted Units. (v) "County Loan Prorata Percentage" means the result, expressed as a percentage, obtained by dividing the Loan by the sum of (i) the Loan; (ii) the City Loan, and (iii) the City RDA Loan, to the extent such funds have been or are disbursed. (w) "County Regulatory Agreement" means the Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants of even date herewith, between the County and Borrower evidencing County requirements applicable to the Loan, to be recorded against the Property. (x) "Deed of Trust" means the Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement, and Fixture Filing of even date herewith among Borrower, as trustor, Old Republic Title Company, as trustee, and the County, as beneficiary, that will encumber the Property to secure repayment of the Loan and performance of the covenants of the Loan Documents. (y) "Default Rate" means the lesser of the maximum rate permitted by law and ten percent (10%) per annum. (z) "Developer Fee" has the meaning set forth in Section 3.18 below. (aa) "Development" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (bb) "Development Fiscal Year" shall mean for the Development, the annual period commencing on January 1 and concluding on December 31 each year. (cc) "Eligible Household" means a household qualified to occupy a HOME- Assisted Unit pursuant to Section 2.1 of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (dd) "Event of Default" has the meaning set forth in Section 6.1 below. (ee) "Final Cost Certification" means a certification of the rehabilitation costs, prepared by Borrower in a form acceptable to the County, and audited by an independent public accountant approved by the County. (ff) "Gross Revenue" means for each calendar year, all revenue, income, receipts, and other consideration actually received from the operation and leasing of the Development. Gross Revenue includes, but is not limited to: 6 863\104\3592078.4 (i) all rents, fees and charges paid by tenants; (ii) Section 8 payments and other rental or operating subsidy payments received for the dwelling units; (iii) deposits forfeited by tenants; (iv) all cancellation fees; (v) price index adjustments and any other rental adjustments to leases or rental agreements; (vi) net proceeds from vending and laundry room machines; (vii) the proceeds of business interruption or similar insurance not paid to senior lenders; (viii) the proceeds of casualty insurance not used to rebuild the Development and not paid to senior lenders; and (ix) condemnation awards for a taking of part or all of the Development for a temporary period. Gross Revenue does not include tenants' security deposits, loan proceeds, unexpended amounts (including interest) in any reserve account, required deposits to reserve accounts, capital contributions or similar advances. (gg) "Hazardous Materials" means: (i) any substance, material, or waste that is petroleum, petroleum-related, or a petroleum by-product, asbestos or asbestos-containing material, polychlorinated biphenyls, flammable, explosive, radioactive, freon gas, radon, or a pesticide, herbicide, or any other agricultural chemical, and (ii) any waste, substance or material defined as or included in the definition of "hazardous substances," "hazardous wastes," "hazardous materials," "toxic materials", "toxic waste", "toxic substances," or words of similar import under any Hazardous Materials Law. (hh) "Hazardous Materials Claims" means with respect to the Property (i) any and all enforcement, cleanup, removal or other governmental or regulatory actions instituted, completed or threatened against Borrower or the Property pursuant to any Hazardous Materials Law; and (ii) all claims made or threatened by any third party against Borrower or the Property relating to damage, contribution, cost recovery compensation, loss or injury resulting from any Hazardous Materials. (ii) "Hazardous Materials Law" means any federal, state or local laws, ordinances, or regulations relating to any Hazardous Materials, health, industrial hygiene, environmental conditions, or the regulation or protection of the environment, and all amendments thereto as of this date and to be added in the future and any successor statute or rule or regulation promulgated thereto. (jj) "HOME" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. 7 863\104\3592078.4 (kk) "HOME-Assisted Units" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph G of the Recitals. (ll) "HOME Monitoring Fee" has the meaning set forth in Section 3.20 below. (mm) "HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement" means the Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants of even date herewith, between the County and Borrower evidencing HUD requirements applicable to the Loan, to be recorded against the Property. (nn) "HOME Funds" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (oo) "HOME Regulations" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (pp) "Housing Authority" means the Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa. (qq) "HTSV Loan" has the meaning set forth in Section 1.1(g)(i). (rr) "HUD" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (ss) "Improvements" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (tt) "Intercreditor Agreement" means that certain Intercreditor Agreement of even date herewith entered into by and among the City, the County, and Borrower related to the Loan, the City Loan, and the City RDA Loan, to be recorded against the Property (uu) "Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts" means one hundred percent (100%) of Residual Receipts. (vv) "Loan Documents" means this Agreement, the Note, the Regulatory Agreements, the Intercreditor Agreement, and the Deed of Trust. (ww) "Loan" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph E of the Recitals. (xx) "NEPA" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph I of the Recitals. (yy) "Note" means the promissory note of even date herewith that evidences Borrower's obligation to repay the Loan. (zz) "Operating Reserve Account" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.2(b) below. (aaa) "Partnership Agreement" means the agreement between Borrower's general partner and the limited partner that governs the operation and organization of Borrower as a California limited partnership. (bbb) "Partnership Management/Asset Fee" means partnership management fees 8 863\104\3592078.4 (including any asset management fees) payable to the partners of Borrower, in the amounts approved by the County as set forth in Section 3.19 below. (ccc) "Property" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (ddd) "Regulatory Agreements" means, collectively, the County Regulatory Agreement and the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. (eee) "Rental Shortfall Due Date" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.8(c) below. (fff) "Rental Shortfall Payment" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.8(c) below. (ggg) "Replacement Reserve Account" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.2(a) below. (hhh) "Residual Receipts" means for each calendar year, the amount by which Gross Revenue exceeds Annual Operating Expenses. (iii) "Retention Amount" means Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) of the HOME Funds, the disbursement of which is described in Section 2.7 below. (jjj) "Senior Loan" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.5 below. (kkk) "Statement of Residual Receipts" means an itemized statement of Residual Receipts. (lll) "TCAC" means the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. (mmm)"Tenant" means the tenant household that occupies a unit in the Development. (nnn) "Term" means the period of time that commences on the date of this Agreement, and expires, unless sooner terminated in accordance with this Agreement, on the fifty-fifth (55th) anniversary of the Completion Date; provided, however, if a record of the Completion Date cannot be located or established, the Term will expire on the fifty-seventh (57th) anniversary of this Agreement. (ooo) "Transfer" has the meaning set forth in Section 6.1 of the Regulatory Agreements. Section 1.2 Exhibits The following exhibits are attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference: Exhibit A: Legal Description of the Property Exhibit B: Approved Development Budget 9 863\104\3592078.4 Exhibit C: NEPA Mitigation Requirements ARTICLE 2 LOAN PROVISIONS Section 2.1 Loan. Upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 2.6 and Section 2.7 of this Agreement, the County shall lend to Borrower the Loan for the purposes set forth in Section 2.3 of this Agreement. Borrower's obligation to repay the Loan is evidenced by the Note. Section 2.2 Interest. (a) Subject to the provisions of subsection (b) below, simple interest will accrue on the outstanding principal balance of the loan at a per annum fixed rate of interest equal to three percent (3%), commencing on the date of disbursement. (b) Upon the occurrence of an Event of a Default, interest on the outstanding principal balance of the Loan will accrue at the Default Rate, beginning on the date of such occurrence and continuing until the date the Loan is repaid in full or the Event of Default is cured. Section 2.3 Use of Loan Funds. (a) Borrower shall use the Loan for rehabilitation costs, consistent with the Approved Development Budget. Use of the Loan for reimbursement of costs incurred prior to the date of this Agreement is subject to Section 92.206(d)(1) of the HOME Regulations. All CDBG Funds must be expended by April 30, 2024. (b) Borrower may not use the Loan proceeds for any other purposes without the prior written consent of the County. Section 2.4 Security. In consideration of the Loan, Borrower shall (i) secure its obligation to repay the Loan, as evidenced by the Note, by executing the Deed of Trust, and cause or permit it to be recorded as a lien against the Property, junior to the HTSV Loan pursuant to Section 2.5 below, and in a co- equal lien position with the City Loan and City RDA Loan pursuant to the Intercreditor Agreement, and (ii) execute the Regulatory Agreements, and the Intercreditor Agreement, and cause or permit them to be recorded against the Property. Section 2.5 Subordination. (a) Any agreement by the County to subordinate the Deed of Trust and/or Regulatory Agreements to an encumbrance securing and/or evidencing the HTSV Loan, (collectively, the "Senior Loan") will be subject to the satisfaction of each of the following conditions: 10 863\104\3592078.4 (i) All of the proceeds of the Senior Loan, less any transaction costs, are used to provide acquisition, construction and/or permanent financing for the Development. (ii) The lender of the Senior Loan is a state or federally chartered financial institution, a nonprofit corporation or a public entity that is not affiliated with Borrower or any of Borrower's affiliates, other than as a depositor or a lender. (iii) Borrower demonstrates to the County's satisfaction that subordination of the Deed of Trust and the Regulatory Agreements is necessary to secure adequate acquisition, construction, and/or permanent financing to ensure the viability of the Development, including the operation of the Development as affordable housing, as required by the Loan Documents. To satisfy this requirement, Borrower must provide to the County, in addition to any other information reasonably required by the County, evidence demonstrating that the proposed amount of the Senior Loan is necessary to provide adequate acquisition, construction, and/or permanent financing to ensure the viability of the Development, and adequate financing for the Development would not be available without the proposed subordination. (iv) The subordination agreement(s) is structured to minimize the risk that the Deed of Trust and the Regulatory Agreements will be extinguished as a result of a foreclosure by the holder of the Senior Loan. To satisfy this requirement, the subordination agreement must provide the County with adequate rights to cure any defaults by Borrower, including: (1) providing the County or its successor with copies of any notices of default at the same time and in the same manner as provided to Borrower; and (2) providing the County with a cure period of at least sixty (60) days to cure any default. (v) The subordination(s) of the Loan is effective only during the original term of the Senior Loan and any extension of its term that is approved in writing by the County. (vi) The subordination does not limit the effect of the Deed of Trust and the Regulatory Agreements before a foreclosure, nor require the consent of the holder(s) of the Senior Loan prior to the County exercising any remedies available to the County under the Loan Documents. (b) Upon a determination by the County's Director – Department of Conservation and Development that the conditions in Subsection (a) have been satisfied, the Director – Department of Conservation and Development or his/her designee will be authorized to execute the approved subordination agreement without the necessity of any further action or approval. Section 2.6 Conditions Precedent to Disbursement of Loan Funds for Rehabilitation. Until the conditions set forth in Section 2.7 have been met, the disbursements made pursuant to this Agreement may not exceed One Million Nine Hundred Forty-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,944,807). The County is not obligated to disburse any portion of the Loan, or to take any other action under the Loan Documents unless all of the following conditions have been and continue to be satisfied: 11 863\104\3592078.4 (a) There exists no Event of Default nor any act, failure, omission or condition that would constitute an Event of Default under this Agreement; (b) Borrower holds title to the Property or is acquiring title to the Property simultaneously with the disbursement of the Loan proceeds; (c) Borrower has delivered to the County copies of all of Borrower's organizational documents, and a copy of a corporate resolution authorizing Borrower to obtain the Loan and all other Approved Financing, and execute the Loan Documents; (d) There exists no material adverse change in the financial condition of Borrower from that shown by the financial statements and other data and information furnished by Borrower to the County prior to the date of this Agreement; (e) Borrower has furnished the County with evidence of the insurance coverage meeting the requirements of Section 4.13 below; (f) Borrower has executed and delivered to the County the Loan Documents and has caused all other documents, instruments, and policies required under the Loan Documents to be delivered to the County; (g) The Deed of Trust, the Regulatory Agreements, and the Intercreditor Agreement, have been recorded against the Property in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Contra Costa; (h) A title insurer reasonably acceptable to the County is unconditionally and irrevocably committed to issuing an LP-10 2021 ALTA Lender's Policy of title insurance insuring the priority of the Deed of Trust in the amount of the Loan, subject only to such exceptions and exclusions as may be reasonably acceptable to the County, and containing such endorsements as the County may reasonably require. Borrower shall provide whatever documentation (including an indemnification agreement), deposits or surety is reasonably required by the title company in order for the County's Deed of Trust to be senior in lien priority to any mechanics liens in connection with any start of construction that has occurred prior to the recordation of the Deed of Trust against the Property in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Contra Costa; (i) All environmental review necessary for the rehabilitation of the Development has been completed, and Borrower has provided the County evidence of planned compliance with all NEPA and CEQA requirements and mitigation measures applicable to construction, and evidence of compliance with all NEPA and CEQA requirements and mitigation measures applicable to preconstruction; (j) The County has determined the undisbursed proceeds of the Loan, together with other funds or firm commitments for funds that Borrower has obtained in connection with the rehabilitation of the Development, are not less than the amount the County determines is necessary to pay for the rehabilitation of the Development and to satisfy all of the covenants contained in this Agreement and the Regulatory Agreements; 12 863\104\3592078.4 (k) Borrower has obtained all permits and approvals necessary for the rehabilitation of the Development; (l) The County has received and approved the Bid Package for the subcontractors for the rehabilitation of the Development pursuant to Section 3.2 below; (m) The County has received and approved the general contractor's construction contract that Borrower has entered or proposed to enter for the rehabilitation of the Development pursuant to Section 3.3 below; (n) The County has received and approved labor and material (payment) bonds and performance bonds as required pursuant to Section 3.4 below; (o) Borrower has closed the HTSV Loan and has already received, or is eligible to receive, the funds; (p) Borrower has provided the County a certification from the Development architect or qualified accessibility specialist that the construction plans are in conformance with the Accessibility Requirements; (q) The County has received a fully executed copy of the Agreement to Enter Housing Assistance Payment Contract between Borrower and the Housing Authority governing the commitment by the Housing Authority of project-based section 8 rental assistance for eight (8) units in the Development; (r) Borrower has provided the County information regarding the market demand for the Development within the past 12 months, which may take the form of waitlist activity, vacancy rates, and unit turn over frequency; (s) Borrower has submitted to the County a construction schedule reflecting a completion date no later than September 30, 2024; (t) The County has received reasonable evidence that the local match requirements set forth in 24 C.F.R. Section 92.218 et seq., have been satisfied pursuant to Section 4.1 of this Agreement; and (u) The County has received a written draw request from Borrower, including: (i) certification that the condition set forth in Section 2.6(a) continues to be satisfied; (ii) certification that the proposed uses of funds is consistent with the Approved Development Budget; (iii) the amount of funds needed; and, (iv) where applicable, a copy of the bill or invoice covering a cost incurred or to be incurred. When a disbursement is requested to pay any contractor in connection with improvements on the Property, the written request must be accompanied by: (1) certification by Borrower's architect reasonably acceptable to the County that the work for which disbursement is requested has been completed (although the County reserves the right to inspect the Property and make an independent evaluation); and (2) lien releases and/or mechanics lien title insurance endorsements reasonably acceptable to the County. 13 863\104\3592078.4 Section 2.7 Conditions Precedent to Disbursement of Retention. The County is not obligated to disburse the Retention Amount unless the following conditions precedent are satisfied: (a) The County has received a completion report from Borrower setting forth: (i) the income, household size, race, and ethnicity of Tenants of the County-Assisted Units; (ii) and the unit address, unit size, rent amount and utility allowance for all County-Assisted Units; (b) The County has received a draft of the Final Cost Certification for the Development from Borrower showing all uses and sources; (c) The County has received from Borrower copies of the certificate of occupancy or equivalent final permit sign-offs for the Development; (d) The County has received from Borrower current evidence of the insurance coverage meeting the requirements of Section 4.13 below; (e) The County has received from Borrower a form of Tenant lease; (f) The County has received from Borrower a Marketing Plan and Tenant Selection Plan as defined in the HOME Regulatory Agreement; (g) The County has received a copy of a social services plan and social services budget for the provision of social services to Tenants; (h) The County has received from Borrower evidence of marketing for any vacant County-Assisted Unit in the Development such as copies of flyers, list of media ads, list of agencies and organizations receiving information on availability of such units, as applicable; (i) The County has received from Borrower all relevant contract activity information, including compliance with Section 3 requirements as set forth in Section 4.6(b)(9) of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement, and minority-owned (MBE) and women-owned (WBE) business requirements; (j) If Borrower was required to comply with relocation requirements as set forth in Section 3.10 below, the County has received from Borrower evidence of compliance with all applicable relocation requirements; (k) The County has received from Borrower a copy of the management agreement and contact information for the property manager of the Development and the name and phone number of the on-site property manager; (l) If Borrower is required to pay prevailing wages under the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148) by the HUD regulations governing the Loan, the County has received confirmation that Borrower has submitted all certified payrolls to the County, and any identified payment issues have been resolved, or Borrower is working diligently to resolve any such issues; (m) The County has received from Borrower evidence of compliance with all 14 863\104\3592078.4 NEPA mitigation requirements as set forth in Exhibit C; (n) The County has received fully executed copy of the Housing Assistance Payment Contract between Borrower and the Housing Authority governing the provision by the Housing Authority of project-based section 8 rental assistance for eight (8) units in the Development; and (o) The County has received a written draw request from Borrower, including certification that the condition set forth in Section 2.6(a) continues to be satisfied, and setting forth the proposed uses of funds consistent with the Approved Development Budget, and, where applicable, a copy of the bill or invoice covering a cost incurred or to be incurred. Borrower shall apply the disbursement for the purpose(s) requested. Section 2.8 Repayment Schedule. (a) Annual Payments of Loan. Commencing on May 1, 2024 and on May 1 of each year thereafter during the Term, Borrower shall make a Loan payment in an amount equal to the County Loan Prorata Percentage of the Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts (each such payment, an "Annual Payment"). The County shall apply all Annual Payments first, to accrued interest; and second, to principal. (b) Special Repayment of the Loan for Failure to Lease. If on or before the Rental Shortfall Due Date, Borrower fails to cause each of the HOME-Assisted Units to be rented to and occupied by an Eligible Household in accordance with the HOME Regulatory Agreement, Borrower shall pay the County the Rental Shortfall Payment, plus accrued interest, on the Rental Shortfall Due Date. (i) The "Rental Shortfall Due Date" is the date that occurs eighteen (18) months after the Completion Date. (ii) The "Rental Shortfall Payment" is an amount equal to the result obtained by multiplying (1) the number of HOME-Assisted Units that have not been rented to and occupied by an Eligible Household on or before the Rental Shortfall Due Date, by (2) a fraction, the numerator of which is the then-outstanding principal balance of the Loan and the denominator of which is the number of HOME-Assisted Units. (iii) Interest on the Rental Shortfall Payment will accrue in accordance with Section 2.2(a) through the Rental Shortfall Due Date. If the Rental Shortfall Payment is not paid on or before the Rental Shortfall Due Date, interest on the Rental Shortfall Payment will accrue at the Default Rate beginning on the day after the Rental Shortfall Due Date and continuing until the Rental Shortfall Payment is paid in full with interest. (c) Payment in Full of Loan. Borrower shall pay all outstanding principal and accrued interest on the Loan, in full, on the earliest to occur of: (i) any Transfer other than as permitted pursuant to Section 6.1 of the Regulatory Agreements; (ii) an Event of Default; and (iii) the expiration of the Term. (d) Prepayment. Borrower may prepay the Loan at any time without premium 15 863\104\3592078.4 or penalty. However, the County Regulatory Agreement will remain in effect for the entire Term (and the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement will remain in effect for the entire HOME Term as defined therein), regardless of any prepayment or Transfer. Section 2.9 Reports and Accounting of Residual Receipts. (a) Borrower shall keep and maintain at the principal place of business of Borrower set forth in Section 7.9 below, or elsewhere with the County's written consent, full, complete and appropriate books, records and accounts necessary or prudent to evidence and substantiate in full detail Borrower's calculation of Residual Receipts and disbursements of Residual Receipts. (b) In connection with the Annual Payment, Borrower shall furnish to the County: (i) The Statement of Residual Receipts for the relevant period. The first Statement of Residual Receipts will cover the period that begins on January 1, 2023 and ends on December 31st of that same year. Subsequent statements of Residual Receipts will cover the twelve-month period that ends on December 31 of each year; (ii) A statement from the independent public accountant that audited Borrower's financial records for the relevant period, which statement must confirm that Borrower's calculation of the Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts is accurate based on Gross Revenue and Annual Operating Expenses; and (iii) Any additional documentation reasonably required by the County to substantiate Borrower's calculation of Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts. (c) The receipt by the County of any statement pursuant to subsection (b) above or any payment by Borrower or acceptance by the County of any Loan repayment for any period does not bind the County as to the correctness of such statement or payment. The County may audit the Residual Receipts and all books, records, and accounts pertaining thereto pursuant to Section 4.6 below. Section 2.10 Non-Recourse. Except as provided below, neither Borrower, nor any partner of Borrower, has any direct or indirect personal liability for payment of the principal of, and interest on, the Loan. Following recordation of the Deed of Trust, the sole recourse of the County with respect to the principal of, or interest on, the Note will be to the property described in the Deed of Trust; provided, however, that nothing contained in the foregoing limitation of liability limits or impairs the enforcement of all the rights and remedies of the County against all such security for the Note, or impairs the right of County to assert the unpaid principal amount of the Note as demand for money within the meaning and intendment of Section 431.70 of the California Code of Civil Procedure or any successor provision thereto. The foregoing limitation of liability is intended to apply only to the obligation to repay the principal and interest on the Note. Nothing contained herein is intended to relieve Borrower of its obligation to indemnify the County under the Loan Documents and Borrower shall be fully and personally liable for: (i) loss or damage of any kind resulting from 16 863\104\3592078.4 waste, fraud or willful misrepresentation; (ii) the failure to pay taxes, assessments or other charges which may create liens on the Property that are payable or applicable prior to any foreclosure under the Deed of Trust (to the full extent of such taxes, assessments or other charges); (iii) the fair market value of any personal property or fixtures removed or disposed of by Borrower other than in accordance with the Deed of Trust; (iv) willful or grossly negligent violation of applicable law; and (v) the misappropriation of any proceeds under any insurance policies or awards resulting from condemnation or the exercise of the power of eminent domain or by reason of damage, loss or destruction to any portion of the Property. ARTICLE 3 REHABILITATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT Section 3.1 Permits and Approvals. Borrower shall obtain all permits or permit ready letter and approvals necessary for the commencement of rehabilitation of the Development no later than March 1, 2024, or such later date that the County approves in writing. Section 3.2 Bid Package. Not later than thirty (30) days prior to Borrower's proposed date for advertising the Bid Package, Borrower shall submit to the County a copy of Borrower's general contractor's proposed Bid Package. The County's Director, Department of Conservation and Development, or his or her designee, shall approve or disapprove the Bid Package within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the Bid Package by the County. If the County rejects the proposed Bid Package the reasons therefore must be given to Borrower. Borrower will then have fifteen (15) days to revise the proposed Bid Package and resubmit it to the County. The County will then have fifteen (15) days to review and approve Borrower's new or corrected Bid Package. The provisions of this Section will continue to apply until a proposed Bid Package has been approved by the County. Borrower may not publish a proposed Bid Package until it has been approved by the County. Section 3.3 Construction Contract. (a) Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the proposed Commencement of Construction, Borrower shall submit to the County for its approval a draft of the proposed construction contract for the Development. All construction work and professional services are to be performed by persons or entities licensed or otherwise authorized to perform the applicable construction work or service in the State of California. Each contract that Borrower enters for rehabilitation of the Development is to provide that at least ten percent (10%) of the costs incurred will be payable only upon completion of the rehabilitation, subject to early release of retention for specified subcontractors upon approval by the County. The construction contract will include all applicable HOME and CDBG requirements set forth in Section 4.6 of the HOME/CDBG Regulatory Agreement. The County's approval of the construction contract may not be deemed to constitute approval of or concurrence with any term or condition of the construction contract except as such term or condition may be required by this Agreement. (b) Upon receipt by the County of the proposed construction contract, the County shall promptly review same and approve or disapprove it within fifteen (15) days. If the 17 863\104\3592078.4 construction contract is not approved by the County, the County shall set forth in writing and notify Borrower of the County's reasons for withholding such approval. Borrower shall thereafter submit a revised construction contract for County approval, which approval is to be granted or denied in fifteen (15) days in accordance with the procedures set forth above. Any construction contract executed by Borrower for the Development is to be in the form approved by the County. Section 3.4 Construction Bonds. Not later than thirty (30) days prior to the proposed Commencement of Construction Borrower shall deliver to the County copies of labor and material bonds and performance bonds for the rehabilitation of the Development in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the scheduled cost of the rehabilitation of the Development. Such bonds must name the County as a co-obligee. Section 3.5 Commencement of Construction. Borrower shall cause the Commencement of Construction of the Development to occur no later than April 1, 2024, or such later date that the County approves in writing, but in no event later than 1 year from date of this Agreement. For the purposes of this Agreement, "Commencement of Construction" means the date set for the start of rehabilitation of the Development in the notice to proceed issued by Borrower to Borrower's general contractor. Section 3.6 Completion of Construction. Borrower shall diligently prosecute rehabilitation of the Development to completion, and shall cause the rehabilitation of the Development to be completed no later than October 31, 2024, or such later date that the County approves in writing. Section 3.7 Changes; Construction Pursuant to Plans and Laws. (a) Changes. Borrower shall rehabilitate the Development in conformance with (i) the plans and specifications approved by the City's building department, and (ii) the Approved Development Budget. Borrower shall notify the County in a timely manner of any changes in the work required to be performed under this Agreement, including any additions, changes, or deletions to the plans and specifications approved by the City. Written authorization from the County must be obtained before any of the following changes, additions, or deletions in work for the Development may be performed: (i) any change in the work the cost of which exceeds One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000); or (ii) any set of changes in the work the cost of which cumulatively Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000) or ten percent (10%) of the Loan amount, whichever is less; or (iii) any material change in building materials or equipment, specifications, or the structural or architectural design or appearance of the Development as provided for in the plans and specifications approved by the County. The County's consent to any additions, changes, or deletions to the work does not relieve or release Borrower from any other obligations under this Agreement, or relieve or release Borrower or its surety from any surety bond. (b) Compliance with Laws. Borrower shall cause all work performed in 18 863\104\3592078.4 connection with the Development to be performed in compliance with: (i) all applicable laws, codes (including building codes and codes applicable to mitigation of disasters such as earthquakes), ordinances, rules and regulations of federal, state, county or municipal governments or agencies now in force or that may be enacted hereafter; (ii) the HOME Regulations including the property standards set out in 24 C.F.R. 92.251 as implemented by Section 5.6 of the HOME Regulatory Agreement; (iii) the requirement of the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4821 et seq.), the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act (42 U.S.C. 4851 et seq.), and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 35; and (iv) all directions, rules and regulations of any fire marshal, health officer, building inspector, or other officer of every governmental agency now having or hereafter acquiring jurisdiction. Borrower may permit the work to proceed only after procurement of each permit, license, or other authorization that may be required by any governmental agency having jurisdiction, and Borrower is responsible to the County for the procurement and maintenance thereof. Section 3.8 Prevailing Wages. (a) Davis Bacon. Borrower shall cause rehabilitation of the Development to be in compliance with the prevailing wage requirements of the federal Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148). Borrower shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the County) the County against any claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of the failure or alleged failure of any person or entity (including Borrower, its contractor and subcontractors) to pay prevailing wages as determined pursuant to the prevailing wage provisions of the federal Davis-Bacon Act and implementing rules and regulations in connection with the rehabilitation of the Development or any other work undertaken or in connection with the Property. This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this Agreement, repayment of the Loan, and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. (b) State Prevailing Wages. (i) To the extent required by applicable law Borrower shall: (1) pay, and shall cause any consultants or contractors to pay, prevailing wages in the rehabilitation of the Development as those wages are determined pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq.; (2) cause any consultants or contractors to employ apprentices as required by California Labor Code Section 1777.5 et seq., and the implementing regulations of the Department of Industrial Relations (the "DIR"), and to comply with the other applicable provisions of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq., 1777.5 et seq., and implementing regulations of the DIR; 19 863\104\3592078.4 (3) keep and retain, and shall cause any consultants and contractors to keep and retain, such records as are necessary to determine if such prevailing wages have been paid as required pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq., and apprentices have been employed are required by California Labor Code Section 1777.5 et seq.; (4) post at the Property, or shall cause the contractor to post at the Property, the applicable prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of the currently applicable current per diem prevailing wages are available from DIR; (5) cause contractors and subcontractors rehabilitating the Development to be registered as set forth in California Labor Code Section 1725.5; (6) cause its contractors and subcontractors, in all calls for bids, bidding materials and the construction contract documents for the rehabilitation of the Development to specify that: (A) no contractor or subcontractor may be listed on a bid proposal nor be awarded a contract for the rehabilitation of the Development unless registered with the DIR pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1725.5; and (B) the rehabilitation of the Development is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. (7) provide the County all information required by California Labor Code Section 1773.3 as set forth in the DIR's online form PWC-100 within 2 days of the award of any contract (https://www.dir.ca.gov/pwc100ext/); (8) cause its contractors to post job site notices, as prescribed by regulation by the DIR; and (9) cause its contractors to furnish payroll records required by California Labor Code Section 1776 directly to the Labor Commissioner, at least monthly in the electronic format prescribed by the Labor Commissioner. (ii) Borrower shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the County) the County against any claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of the failure or alleged failure of any person or entity (including Borrower, its contractor and subcontractors) to pay prevailing wages as determined pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1720 et seq., to employ apprentices pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1777.5 et seq., to meet the conditions of California Labor Code Section 1771.4, and implementing regulations of the DIR, or to comply with the other applicable provisions of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq., 1777.5 et seq., and 1771.4, and the implementing regulations of the DIR, in connection with the rehabilitation of the Development or any other work undertaken or in connection with the Property. This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this Agreement, repayment of the Loan, and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. 20 863\104\3592078.4 Section 3.9 Accessibility. (a) Borrower shall cause the Development to be rehabilitated and operated at all times in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local disabled persons accessibility requirements including, but not limited to the applicable provisions of: (i) the Unruh Act, (ii) the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, (iii) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (iv) the United States Fair Housing Act, as amended, (v) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and (vi) Chapters 11A and 11B of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which relate to disabled persons access (collectively, the "Accessibility Requirements"). (b) In compliance with the Accessibility Requirements, if the rehabilitation is substantial as defined in 24 C.F.R. 8.23(a): (i) a minimum of two (2) units of the Improvements must be rehabilitated to be fully accessible to households with a mobility impaired member and, (ii) an additional one (1) unit of the Improvements must be rehabilitated to be fully accessible to hearing and/or visually impaired persons. Non-substantial alterations must comply with 24 C.F.R. 8.23(b). In compliance with the Accessibility Requirements Borrower shall provide the County with a certification from the Development architect that to the best of the architect's knowledge, the Development complies with all federal and state accessibility requirements applicable to the Development. (c) Borrower shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the County) the County against any claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties or other amounts arising out of the failure or alleged failure of any person or entity (including Borrower, its architect, contractor and subcontractors) to construct the Development in accordance with the Accessibility Requirements. This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this Agreement, repayment of the Loan and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. Section 3.10 Relocation. (a) If and to the extent that development of the Property will result in the permanent or temporary displacement of residential tenants, homeowners, or businesses, then Borrower shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal statutes and regulations, (including without limitation the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), and implementing regulations at 49 C.F.R. Part 24; Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. 42 et seq.; 24 C.F.R. 92.353; 24 C.F.R. 570.606; and California Government Code Section 7260 et seq. and implementing regulations at 25 California Code of Regulations Sections 6000 et seq.) with respect to preparation of a relocation plan, relocation planning, advisory assistance, and payment of monetary benefits. Borrower shall be solely responsible for payment of any relocation benefits to any displaced persons and any other obligations associated with complying with such relocation laws. (b) Borrower shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless, (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the County), the County and its board members, supervisors, directors, officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns against any claim for damages, compensation, fines, penalties, relocation payments or other amounts and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of the failure or alleged failure of any person or entity 21 863\104\3592078.4 (including Borrower, or the County) to satisfy relocation obligations related to the acquisition and development of the Property. This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this Agreement, repayment of the Loan and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. Section 3.11 Equal Opportunity. During the rehabilitation of the Development discrimination on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, or disability in the hiring, firing, promoting, or demoting of any person engaged in the construction work is not allowed. Section 3.12 Minority and Women-Owned Contractors. Borrower shall use its best efforts to afford minority-owned and women-owned business enterprises the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in the rehabilitation of the Development. Borrower shall, at a minimum, notify applicable minority-owned and women- owned business firms located in Contra Costa County of bid opportunities for the rehabilitation of the Development. A listing of minority owned and women owned businesses located in the County and neighboring counties is available from the County. Documentation of such notifications must be maintained by Borrower and available to the County upon request. Section 3.13 Progress Reports. Until such time as Borrower has received a certificate of occupancy from the City for the Development, Borrower shall provide the County with quarterly progress reports regarding the status of the rehabilitation of the Development, including a certification that the actual rehabilitation costs to date conform to the Approved Development Budget, as it may be amended from time to time pursuant to Section 3.17 below. Section 3.14 Construction Responsibilities. (a) Borrower is responsible for the coordination and scheduling of the work to be performed so that commencement and completion of the rehabilitation of the Development takes place in accordance with this Agreement. (b) Borrower is solely responsible for all aspects of Borrower's conduct in connection with the Development, including (but not limited to) the quality and suitability of the plans and specifications, the supervision of rehabilitation work, and the qualifications, financial condition, and performance of all architects, engineers, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, consultants, and property managers. Any review or inspection undertaken by the County with reference to the Development is solely for the purpose of determining whether Borrower is properly discharging its obligations to the County, and may not be relied upon by Borrower or by any third parties as a warranty or representation by the County as to the quality of the design or construction of the Development. Section 3.15 Mechanics Liens, Stop Notices, and Notices of Completion. (a) If any claim of lien is filed against the Property or a stop notice affecting 22 863\104\3592078.4 the Loan is served on the County or any other lender or other third party in connection with the Development, then Borrower shall, within twenty (20) days after such filing or service, either pay and fully discharge the lien or stop notice, effect the release of such lien or stop notice by delivering to the County a surety bond in sufficient form and amount, or provide the County with other assurance satisfactory to the County that the claim of lien or stop notice will be paid or discharged. (b) If Borrower fails to discharge any lien, encumbrance, charge, or claim in the manner required in this Section, then in addition to any other right or remedy, the County may (but is under no obligation to) discharge such lien, encumbrance, charge, or claim at Borrower's expense. Alternately, the County may require Borrower to immediately deposit with the County the amount necessary to satisfy such lien or claim and any costs, pending resolution thereof. The County may use such deposit to satisfy any claim or lien that is adversely determined against Borrower. (c) Borrower shall file a valid notice of cessation or notice of completion upon cessation of rehabilitation work on the Development for a continuous period of thirty (30) days or more, and take all other steps necessary to forestall the assertion of claims of lien against the Property. Borrower authorizes the County, but the County has no obligation, to record any notices of completion or cessation of labor, or any other notice that the County deems necessary or desirable to protect its interest in the Development and Property. Section 3.16 Inspections. (a) Borrower shall permit and facilitate, and shall require its contractors to permit and facilitate, observation and inspection at the Development by the County and by public authorities during reasonable business hours during the Term, for the purposes of determining compliance with this Agreement. (b) The County will perform inspections both during and upon completion of rehabilitation of the Development to determine if the Development is being rehabilitated in accordance with the HOME Regulations, including the property standards set forth in 24 C.F.R. 92.251. Borrower shall give the County notice when the rehabilitation of the Development is complete. If the County determines the Development is not being rehabilitated in accordance with the HOME Regulations, the County will provide Borrower with a written report of the deficiencies. Borrower shall correct such deficiencies within the timeframe set forth in the notice provided to Borrower by the County. The Development may not be occupied until such deficiencies have been corrected to the satisfaction of the County. Section 3.17 Approved Development Budget; Revisions to Budget. As of the date of this Agreement, the County has approved the Approved Development Budget set forth in Exhibit B. Borrower shall submit any required amendments to the Approved Development Budget to the County for approval within five (5) days after the date Borrower receives information indicating that actual costs of the Development vary or will vary from the costs shown on the Approved Development Budget. Written consent of the County will be required to amend the Approved Development Budget. 23 863\104\3592078.4 Section 3.18 Developer Fee. The maximum cumulative fee that may be paid to any entity or entities providing development services to the Development, whether paid up front out of development sources or on a deferred basis, is not to exceed Two Hundred Fifty-Four Thousand Six Hundred Ninety- One Dollars, Ninety-Nine Thousand Dollars ($254,691) (the "Developer Fee"). Section 3.19 Partnership Management/Asset Fee. The Partnership Management/Asset Fee is not to exceed Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000). Unpaid Partnership Management/Asset Fees may accrue for a period not to exceed three (3) fiscal years following the year during which they are earned. Section 3.20 HOME Monitoring Fee. In connection with the restrictions imposed on the Development pursuant to the HOME Regulatory Agreement, Borrower shall pay to the County a compliance monitoring fee in the amount of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250) per HOME-Assisted Unit per year (the "HOME Monitoring Fee"). The HOME Monitoring Fee is payable annually throughout the Term on the same date that the Annual Payment is due, regardless of whether there are sufficient Residual Receipts to make an Annual Payment. Section 3.21 NEPA Mitigation Requirements. Borrower shall comply with the NEPA mitigation requirements set forth in the attached Exhibit C in the rehabilitation of the Development. ARTICLE 4 LOAN REQUIREMENTS Section 4.1 Match Requirement. The Borrower shall ensure that the Loan is matched with a minimum of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000) in other, non-federal sources, pursuant to and eligible under applicable HOME Regulations. Section 4.2 Reserve Accounts. (a) Replacement Reserve Account. Borrower shall establish and maintain an account that is available for capital expenditures for repairs and replacement necessary to maintain the Development in the condition required by the Loan Documents (the "Replacement Reserve Account"). Borrower shall make annual deposits to the Replacement Reserve Account in an amount equal to at least the lesser of 0.6% of estimated rehabilitation costs associated with structures in the Development, excluding construction contingency and general requirements, or Six Hundred Dollars ($600) per unit. (b) Operating Reserve Account. Borrower shall establish and maintain an account that is available to fund operating deficits (which is the amount by which Annual 24 863\104\3592078.4 Operating Expenses exceed Gross Revenue for any period) (the "Operating Reserve Account"). Commencing on the first day of the month after execution of this Agreement, and on the first of each month thereafter, Borrower shall capitalize the Operating Reserve Account in the amount of two percent (2%) of the gross rental income from the Development until the Operating Reserve Account reaches an amount equal to six (6) months of Operating Expenses. Borrower shall replenish the Operating Reserve Account monthly as needed such that the Operating Reserve Account is maintained at the level of at least six (6) months of Operating Expenses for the period during which the Development is regulated by the County Regulatory Agreement. Section 4.3 Financial Accountings and Post-Completion Audits. No later than one hundred twenty (120) days following completion of rehabilitation of the Development, Borrower shall provide to the County for its review and approval an audited financial report showing the sources and uses of all funds utilized for the rehabilitation of the Development. This requirement may be satisfied by providing the Final Cost Certification to the County. Section 4.4 Approval of Annual Operating Budget. Borrower shall provide the following to the County for its review and approval: (i) by not later than sixty (60) days prior to commencement of each Development Fiscal Year for the Term, the estimated annual budget for the upcoming Development Fiscal Year for the operations of the Development which shall include projected income from all sources, projected expenses, including operating expenses, debt service, and deposits to and withdrawals from Development reserves (the "Annual Operating Budget"); and (ii) within ninety (90) days following the end of each Development Fiscal Year, a report showing the actual income and expenditures with respect to the Development for the immediately preceding Development Fiscal Year and the status of Development reserves. The County's review shall be limited to whether the Development is being operated and managed in accordance with the requirements and standards of the Loan Documents. The County may request additional information to assist the County in evaluating the financial viability of the Development. Unless rejected by the County in writing within thirty (30) days after receipt of the budget, the budget will be deemed accepted. If rejected by the County in whole or in part, Borrower shall submit a new or corrected budget within thirty (30) calendar days after notification of the County's rejection and the reasons therefor. The provisions of this Section relating to time periods for resubmission of new or corrected budgets will continue to apply until such budget has been approved by the County. Section 4.5 Information. Borrower shall provide any information reasonably requested by the County in connection with the Development, including (but not limited to) any information required by HUD in connection with Borrower's use of the Loan funds. Section 4.6 County Audits. (a) Each year, Borrower shall provide the County with a copy of Borrower's annual audit, which is to include information on all of Borrower's activities and not just those pertaining to the Development. 25 863\104\3592078.4 (b) In addition, the County may, at any time, audit all of Borrower's books, records, and accounts pertaining to the Development including but not limited to the Residual Receipts of the Development. Any such audit is to be conducted during normal business hours upon reasonable notice of not less than 48 hours at the principal place of business of Borrower and wherever records are kept. Immediately after the completion of an audit, the County shall deliver a copy of the results of the audit to Borrower. (c) If it is determined as a result of an audit that there has been a deficiency in a loan repayment to the County then such deficiency will become immediately due and payable, with interest at the Default Rate from the date the deficient amount should have been paid. In addition, if the audit determines that Residual Receipts have been understated for any year by the greater of: (i) Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500); and (ii) an amount that exceeds five percent (5%) of the Residual Receipts, then, in addition to paying the deficiency with interest, Borrower shall pay all of the County's costs and expenses connected with the audit and review of Borrower's accounts and records. Section 4.7 Hazardous Materials. (a) Borrower shall keep and maintain the Property (including but not limited to, soil and ground water conditions) in compliance with all Hazardous Materials Laws and may not cause or permit the Property to be in violation of any Hazardous Materials Law. Borrower may not cause or permit the use, generation, manufacture, storage or disposal of on, under, or about the Property or transportation to or from the Property of any Hazardous Materials, except such of the foregoing as may be customarily used in construction of projects like the Development or kept and used in and about residential property of this type. (b) Borrower shall immediately advise the County in writing if at any time it receives written notice of any Hazardous Materials Claims, and Borrower's discovery of any occurrence or condition on any real property adjoining or in the vicinity of the Property that could cause the Property or any part thereof to be subject to any restrictions on the ownership, occupancy, transferability or use of the Property under any Hazardous Materials Law including but not limited to the provisions of California Health and Safety Code, Section 25220 et seq., or any regulation adopted in accordance therewith. (c) The County has the right to join and participate in, as a party if it so elects, and be represented by counsel acceptable to the County (or counsel of its own choice if a conflict exists with Borrower) in any legal proceedings or actions initiated in connection with any Hazardous Materials Claims and to have its reasonable attorneys' fees in connection therewith paid by Borrower. (d) Borrower shall indemnify and hold harmless the County and its board members, supervisors, directors, officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns from and against any loss, damage, cost, fine, penalty, judgment, award, settlement, expense or liability, directly or indirectly arising out of or attributable to: (i) any actual or alleged past or present violation of any Hazardous Materials Law; (ii) any Hazardous Materials Claim; (iii) any actual or alleged past or present use, generation, manufacture, storage, release, threatened release, discharge, disposal, transportation, or presence of Hazardous Materials on, under, or about the Property; (iv) any investigation, cleanup, remediation, removal, or restoration work of site 26 863\104\3592078.4 conditions of the Property relating to Hazardous Materials (whether on the Property or any other property); and (v) the breach of any representation of warranty by or covenant of Borrower in this Section 4.7, and Section 5.1(l). Such indemnity shall include, without limitation: (x) all consequential damages; (y) the costs of any required or necessary investigation, repair, cleanup or detoxification of the Property and the preparation and implementation of any closure, remedial or other required plans; and (z) all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the County in connection with clauses (x) and (y), including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees and consultant fees. This indemnification applies whether or not any government agency has issued a cleanup order. Losses, claims, costs, suits, liability, and expenses covered by this indemnification provision include, but are not limited to: (1) losses attributable to diminution in the value of the Property, (2) loss or restriction of use of rentable space on the Property, (3) adverse effect on the marketing of any rental space on the Property, and (4) penalties and fines levied by, and remedial or enforcement actions of any kind issued by any regulatory agency (including but not limited to the costs of any required testing, remediation, repair, removal, cleanup or detoxification of the Property and surrounding properties). This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this Agreement, repayment of the Loan and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust, and will not be diminished or affected in any respect as a result of any notice, disclosure, knowledge, if any, to or by the County of Hazardous Materials. (e) Without the County's prior written consent, which will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, Borrower may not take any remedial action in response to the presence of any Hazardous Materials on, under or about the Property, nor enter into any settlement agreement, consent decree, or other compromise in respect to any Hazardous Material Claims, which remedial action, settlement, consent decree or compromise might, in the County's judgment, impair the value of the County's security hereunder; provided, however, that the County's prior consent is not necessary in the event that the presence of Hazardous Materials on, under, or about the Property either poses an immediate threat to the health, safety or welfare of any individual or is of such a nature that an immediate remedial response is necessary and it is not reasonably possible to obtain the County's consent before taking such action, provided that in such event Borrower shall notify the County as soon as practicable of any action so taken. The County agrees not to withhold its consent, where such consent is required hereunder, if: (i) a particular remedial action is ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction; (ii) Borrower will or may be subjected to civil or criminal sanctions or penalties if it fails to take a required action; (iii) Borrower establishes to the satisfaction of the County that there is no reasonable alternative to such remedial action which would result in less impairment of the County's security hereunder; or (iv) the action has been agreed to by the County. (f) Borrower hereby acknowledges and agrees that: (i) this Section is intended as the County's written request for information (and Borrower's response) concerning the environmental condition of the Property as required by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5; and (ii) each representation and warranty in this Agreement (together with any indemnity obligation applicable to a breach of any such representation and warranty) with respect to the environmental condition of the Property is intended by the Parties to be an "environmental provision" for purposes of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 736. (g) In the event that any portion of the Property is determined to be "environmentally impaired" (as that term is defined in California Code of Civil Procedure 27 863\104\3592078.4 Section 726.5(e)(3)) or to be an "affected parcel" (as that term is defined in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(e)(1)), then, without otherwise limiting or in any way affecting the County's or the trustee's rights and remedies under the Deed of Trust, the County may elect to exercise its rights under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(a) to: (i) waive its lien on such environmentally impaired or affected portion of the Property; and (ii) exercise, (1) the rights and remedies of an unsecured creditor, including reduction of its claim against Borrower to judgment, and (2) any other rights and remedies permitted by law. For purposes of determining the County's right to proceed as an unsecured creditor under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(a), Borrower will be deemed to have willfully permitted or acquiesced in a release or threatened release of Hazardous Materials, within the meaning of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(d)(1), if the release or threatened release of Hazardous Materials was knowingly or negligently caused or contributed to by any lessee, occupant, or user of any portion of the Property and Borrower knew or should have known of the activity by such lessee, occupant, or user which caused or contributed to the release or threatened release. All costs and expenses, including (but not limited to) attorneys' fees, incurred by the County in connection with any action commenced under this paragraph, including any action required by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 726.5(b) to determine the degree to which the Property is environmentally impaired, plus interest thereon at the Default Rate, until paid, will be added to the indebtedness secured by the Deed of Trust and is due and payable to the County upon its demand made at any time following the conclusion of such action. Section 4.8 Maintenance; Damage and Destruction. (a) During the course of both rehabilitation and operation of the Development, Borrower shall maintain the Development and the Property in good repair and in a neat, clean and orderly condition, reasonable wear and tear accepted and in accordance with the Regulatory Agreements. (b) Subject to the requirements of senior lenders, and if economically feasible in the County's judgment after consultation with Borrower, if any improvement now or in the future on the Property is damaged or destroyed, then Borrower shall, at its cost and expense, diligently undertake to repair or restore such improvement consistent with the plans and specifications approved by the County with such changes as have been approved by the County. Such work or repair is to be commenced no later than the later of one hundred twenty (120) days, or such longer period approved by the County in writing, after the damage or loss occurs or thirty (30) days following receipt of the insurance or condemnation proceeds, and is to be complete within one (1) year thereafter. Any insurance or condemnation proceeds collected for such damage or destruction are to be applied to the cost of such repairs or restoration and, if such insurance or condemnation proceeds are insufficient for such purpose, then Borrower shall make up the deficiency. If Borrower does not promptly make such repairs then any insurance or condemnation proceeds collected for such damage or destruction are to be promptly delivered by Borrower to the County as a special repayment of the Loan, subject to the rights of the senior lenders, if any. Section 4.9 Fees and Taxes. Borrower is solely responsible for payment of all fees, assessments, taxes, charges, and levies imposed by any public authority or utility company with respect to the Property or the 28 863\104\3592078.4 Development, and shall pay such charges prior to delinquency and at such times and in such manner as to prevent any penalty from accruing, or any lien or charge from attaching to the Property. Borrower is also solely responsible for payment of all personal property taxes, and all franchise, income, employment, old age benefit, withholding, sales, and other taxes assessed against it, or payable by it, and shall pay such charges prior to delinquency and at such times and in such manner as to prevent any penalty from accruing, or any lien or charge from attaching to the Property. However, Borrower is not required to pay and discharge any such charge so long as: (i) the legality thereof is being contested diligently and in good faith and by appropriate proceedings; and (ii) if requested by the County, Borrower deposits with the County any funds or other forms of assurance that the County in good faith from time to time determines appropriate to protect the County from the consequences of the contest being unsuccessful. In the event Borrower exercises its right to contest any tax, assessment, or charge against it, Borrower, on final determination of the proceeding or contest, will immediately pay or discharge any decision or judgment rendered against it, together with all costs, charges and interest. Borrower shall not apply for a property tax exemption for the Property under any provision of law except California Revenue and Taxation Section 214(g) without the prior written consent of the County. Section 4.10 Notices. Borrower shall promptly notify the County in writing of any and all of the following: (a) Any litigation known to Borrower materially affecting Borrower, or the Property and of any claims or disputes that involve a material risk of litigation; (b) Any written or oral communication Borrower receives from any governmental, judicial, or legal authority giving notice of any claim or assertion that the Property or Improvements fail in any respect to comply with any applicable governmental law; (c) Any material adverse change in the physical condition of the Property (including any damage suffered as a result of fire, earthquakes, or floods); (d) Any material adverse change in Borrower's financial condition, any material adverse change in Borrower's operations, or any change in the management of Borrower; (e) That any of the statements in Section 5.1(l) regarding Hazardous Materials are no longer accurate; (f) Any Default or event which, with the giving of notice or the passage of time or both, would constitute a Default; and (g) Any other circumstance, event, or occurrence that results in a material adverse change in Borrower's ability to timely perform any of its obligations under any of the 29 863\104\3592078.4 Loan Documents. Section 4.11 Operation of Development as Affordable Housing. Borrower shall operate the Development (i) in accordance with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, rules and regulations of federal, state, county or municipal governments or agencies now in force or that may be enacted hereafter, and (ii) as an affordable housing development consistent with: (1) HUD's requirements for use of HOME Funds and CDBG Funds; (2) the Regulatory Agreements; (3) any other regulatory requirements imposed on Borrower including but not limited to regulatory agreements associated with the City Loan and the City RDA Loan, and Low Income Housing Tax Credits provided by TCAC; and (4) any regulatory requirements imposed on Borrower related to the rental subsidies provided to the Development. Section 4.12 Nondiscrimination. (a) Borrower covenants by and for itself and its successors and assigns that there will be no discrimination against or segregation of a person or of a group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, source of income (e.g., SSI), ancestry, age, familial status (except for lawful senior housing in accordance with state and federal law), or disability, in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the Property, nor may Borrower or any person claiming under or through Borrower establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees in the Property. The foregoing covenant will run with the land. (b) Nothing in this Section prohibits Borrower from requiring the County- Assisted Units in the Development to be available to and occupied by income eligible households in accordance with the Regulatory Agreements. Section 4.13 Insurance Requirements. (a) Borrower shall maintain the following insurance coverage throughout the Term of the Loan: (i) Workers' Compensation insurance to the extent required by law, including Employer's Liability coverage, with limits not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each accident. (ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with limits not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) each occurrence combined single limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including coverages for Contractual Liability, Personal Injury, Broad form Property Damage, Products and Completed Operations (which limits may be met through excess/umbrella coverage in the amount of $15,000,000). (iii) Automobile Liability insurance with limits not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each occurrence combined single limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including coverages for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles, as applicable. 30 863\104\3592078.4 (iv) Builders' Risk insurance during the course of construction, and upon completion of construction, property insurance covering the Development, in form appropriate for the nature of such property, covering all risks of loss, excluding earthquake, for one hundred percent (100%) of the replacement value, with deductible, if any, acceptable to the County, naming the County as a Loss Payee, as its interests may appear. Flood insurance must be obtained if required by applicable federal regulations. (v) Commercial crime insurance covering all officers and employees, for loss of Loan proceeds caused by dishonesty, in an amount approved by the County, naming the County a Loss Payee, as its interests may appear. (b) Borrower shall cause any general contractor, agent, or subcontractor working on the Development under direct contract with Borrower or subcontract to maintain insurance of the types and in at least the minimum amounts described in subsections (i), (ii), and (iii) above, except that the limit of liability for commercial general liability insurance for subcontractors must be One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), and must require that such insurance will meet all of the general requirements of subsections (d) and (e) below. (c) The required insurance must be provided under an occurrence form, and Borrower shall maintain the coverage described in subsection (a) continuously throughout the Term. Should any of the required insurance be provided under a form of coverage that includes an annual aggregate limit or provides that claims investigation or legal defense costs be included in such annual aggregate limit, such annual aggregate limit must be three times the occurrence limits specified above. (d) Commercial General Liability, Automobile Liability and Property insurance policies must be endorsed to name as an additional insured the County and its officers, agents, employees and members of the County Board of Supervisors. (e) All policies and bonds are to contain: (i) the agreement of the insurer to give the County at least ten (10) days' notice prior to cancellation or material change for non- payment of premium, and thirty (30) days' notice prior to cancellation for any other change or cancellation in said policies; (ii) an agreement that such policies are primary and non-contributing with any insurance that may be carried by the County; (iii) a provision that no act or omission of Borrower shall affect or limit the obligation of the insurance carrier to pay the amount of any loss sustained; and (iv) a waiver by the insurer of all rights of subrogation against the County and its authorized parties in connection with any loss or damage thereby insured against. Section 4.14 Covenants Regarding Approved Financing and Partnership Agreement. (a) Borrower shall promptly pay the principal and interest when due on any Approved Financing. (b) Borrower shall promptly notify the County in writing of the existence of any default under any documents evidencing Approved Financing whether or not a default has been declared by the lender, and any defaults under the Partnership Agreement, and provide the County copies of any notice of default. 31 863\104\3592078.4 (c) Borrower may not amend, modify, supplement, cancel or terminate the Partnership Agreement or any documents related to any loan that is part of the Approved Financing without the prior written consent of the County except for amendments solely to effectuate Transfers permitted under Section 6.1 of the Regulatory Agreements. Borrower shall provide the County copies of all amendments, modifications, and supplements to the Partnership Agreement and any document related to any loan that is part of Approved Financing. (d) Borrower may not incur any indebtedness of any kind other than Approved Financing or encumber the Development with any liens (other than liens for Approved Financing approved by the County) without the prior written consent of the County. (e) To the extent the Partnership Agreement is inconsistent with this Agreement with respect to the repayment of the Loan including, without limitation, the Residual Receipts definition and the payment provisions of Section 2.8 above, this Agreement will control. Any payments made in conflict with the Residual Receipts definition and payment requirements of this Agreement will be considered an Event of Default. ARTICLE 5 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF BORROWER Section 5.1 Representations and Warranties. Borrower hereby represents and warrants to the County as follows and acknowledges, understands, and agrees that the representations and warranties set forth in this Article 5 are deemed to be continuing during all times when any portion of the Loan remains outstanding: (a) Organization. Borrower is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California and has the power and authority to own its property and carry on its business as now being conducted. (b) Authority of Borrower. Borrower has full power and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement and to make and accept the borrowings contemplated hereunder, to execute and deliver the Loan Documents and all other documents or instruments executed and delivered, or to be executed and delivered, pursuant to this Agreement, and to perform and observe the terms and provisions of all of the above. (c) Authority of Persons Executing Documents. This Agreement and the Loan Documents and all other documents or instruments executed and delivered, or to be executed and delivered, pursuant to this Agreement have been executed and delivered by persons who are duly authorized to execute and deliver the same for and on behalf of Borrower, and all actions required under Borrower's organizational documents and applicable governing law for the authorization, execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the Loan Documents and all other documents or instruments executed and delivered, or to be executed and delivered, pursuant to this Agreement, have been duly taken. (d) Valid Binding Agreements. The Loan Documents and all other documents or instruments executed and delivered pursuant to or in connection with this 32 863\104\3592078.4 Agreement constitute or, if not yet executed or delivered, will when so executed and delivered constitute, legal, valid and binding obligations of Borrower enforceable against it in accordance with their respective terms. (e) No Breach of Law or Agreement. Neither the execution nor delivery of the Loan Documents or of any other documents or instruments executed and delivered, or to be executed or delivered, pursuant to this Agreement, nor the performance of any provision, condition, covenant or other term hereof or thereof, will: (i) conflict with or result in a breach of any statute, rule or regulation, or any judgment, decree or order of any court, board, commission or agency whatsoever that is binding on Borrower, or conflict with any provision of the organizational documents of Borrower, or conflict with any agreement to which Borrower is a party; or (ii) result in the creation or imposition of any lien upon any assets or property of Borrower, other than liens established pursuant hereto. (f) Compliance with Laws; Consents and Approvals. The rehabilitation of the Development will comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations of federal, state and local governments and agencies and with all applicable directions, rules and regulations of the fire marshal, health officer, building inspector and other officers of any such government or agency. (g) Pending Proceedings. Borrower is not in default under any law or regulation or under any order of any court, board, commission or agency whatsoever, and there are no claims, actions, suits or proceedings pending or, to the knowledge of Borrower, threatened against or affecting Borrower or the Development, at law or in equity, before or by any court, board, commission or agency whatsoever which might, if determined adversely to Borrower, materially affect Borrower's ability to repay the Loan or impair the security to be given to the County pursuant hereto. (h) Title to Land. At the time of recordation of the Deed of Trust, Borrower will have good and marketable fee title to the Development and there will exist thereon or with respect thereto no mortgage, lien, pledge or other encumbrance of any character whatsoever other than liens shown on the County's title policy provided pursuant to Section 2.6(h) above, or approved in writing by the County. (i) Financial Statements. The financial statements of Borrower and other financial data and information furnished by Borrower to the County fairly and accurately present the information contained therein. As of the date of this Agreement, there has not been any material adverse change in the financial condition of Borrower from that shown by such financial statements and other data and information. (j) Sufficient Funds. Borrower holds sufficient funds and/or binding commitments for sufficient funds to complete the rehabilitation of the Development in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. (k) Taxes. Borrower and its subsidiaries have filed all federal and other material tax returns and reports required to be filed, and have paid all federal and other material taxes, assessments, fees and other governmental charges levied or imposed upon them or their income or the Property otherwise due and payable, except those that are being contested in good 33 863\104\3592078.4 faith by appropriate proceedings and for which adequate reserves have been provided in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. There is no proposed tax assessment against Borrower or any of its subsidiaries that could, if made, be reasonably expected to have a material adverse effect on the property, liabilities (actual or contingent), operations, condition (financial or otherwise) or prospects of Borrower and its subsidiaries, taken as a whole, or which could result in (i) a material impairment of the ability of Borrower to perform under any loan document to which it is a party, or (ii) a material adverse effect upon the legality, validity, binding effect or enforceability against Borrower of any Loan Document. (l) Hazardous Materials. To the best of Borrower's knowledge, except as disclosed in writing by Borrower to the County prior to the date of this Agreement: (i) no Hazardous Material has been disposed of, stored on, discharged from, or released to or from, or otherwise now exists in, on, under, or around, the Property; (ii) neither the Property nor Borrower is in violation of any Hazardous Materials Law; and (iii) neither the Property nor Borrower is subject to any existing, pending or threatened Hazardous Materials Claims. ARTICLE 6 DEFAULT AND REMEDIES Section 6.1 Events of Default. Any one or more of the following constitutes an "Event of Default" by Borrower under this Agreement: (a) Failure to Construct. If Borrower fails to obtain permits, or to commence and prosecute rehabilitation of the Development to completion, within the times set forth in Article 3 above, subject to force majeure. (b) Failure to Make Payment. If Borrower fails to make any payment when such payment is due pursuant to the Loan Documents. (c) Failure to Submit Plans. If Borrower fails to submit a Marketing Plan or Tenant Selection Plan that is approved by the County in accordance with the Regulatory Agreements. (d) Breach of Covenants. If Borrower fails to duly perform, comply with, or observe any other condition, term, or covenant contained in this Agreement (other than as set forth in Section 6.1(a) through Section 6.1(c), and Section 6.1(e) through Section 6.1(m)), or in any of the other Loan Documents, and Borrower fails to cure such default within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice thereof from the County to Borrower. (e) Default Under Other Loans. If a default is declared under any other financing for the Development by the lender of such financing and such default remains uncured following any applicable notice and cure period. (f) Insolvency. If a court having jurisdiction makes or enters any decree or order: (i) adjudging Borrower to be bankrupt or insolvent; (ii) approving as properly filed a 34 863\104\3592078.4 petition seeking reorganization of Borrower, or seeking any arrangement for Borrower under the bankruptcy law or any other applicable debtor's relief law or statute of the United States or any state or other jurisdiction; (iii) appointing a receiver, trustee, liquidator, or assignee of Borrower in bankruptcy or insolvency or for any of their properties; (iv) directing the winding up or liquidation of Borrower if any such decree or order described in clauses (i) to (iv), inclusive, is unstayed or undischarged for a period of ninety (90) calendar days; or (v) Borrower admits in writing its inability to pay its debts as they fall due or will have voluntarily submitted to or filed a petition seeking any decree or order of the nature described in clauses (i) to (iv), inclusive. The occurrence of any of the Events of Default in this paragraph will act to accelerate automatically, without the need for any action by the County, the indebtedness evidenced by the Note. (g) Assignment; Attachment. If Borrower assigns its assets for the benefit of its creditors or suffers a sequestration or attachment of or execution on any substantial part of its property, unless the property so assigned, sequestered, attached or executed upon is returned or released within ninety (90) calendar days after such event or, if sooner, prior to sale pursuant to such sequestration, attachment, or execution. The occurrence of any of the events of default in this paragraph shall act to accelerate automatically, without the need for any action by the County, the indebtedness evidenced by the Note. (h) Suspension; Termination. If Borrower voluntarily suspends its business or, the partnership is dissolved or terminated, other than a technical termination of the partnership for tax purposes. (i) Liens on Property and the Development. If any claim of lien (other than liens allowed pursuant to any Loan Document or approved in writing by the County) is filed against the Development or any part thereof, or any interest or right made appurtenant thereto, or the service of any notice to withhold proceeds of the Loan and the continued maintenance of said claim of lien or notice to withhold for a period of twenty (20) days, without discharge or satisfaction thereof or provision therefor (including, without limitation, the posting of bonds) satisfactory to the County. (j) Condemnation. If there is a condemnation, seizure, or appropriation of all or the substantial part of the Property and the Development other than by the County. (k) Unauthorized Transfer. If any Transfer occurs other than as permitted pursuant to Section 6.1 of the Regulatory Agreements. (l) Representation or Warranty Incorrect. If any Borrower representation or warranty contained in this Agreement, or in any application, financial statement, certificate, or report submitted to the County in connection with any of the Loan Documents, proves to have been incorrect in any material respect when made. (m) Applicability to General Partner. The occurrence of any of the events set forth in Section 6.1(f), through Section 6.1(h) in relation to Borrower's managing general partner. Section 6.2 Remedies. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default and until such Event of Default is cured or 35 863\104\3592078.4 waived, the County is relieved of any obligation to disburse any portion of the Loan. In addition, upon the occurrence of an Event of Default and following the expiration of all applicable notice and cure periods the County may proceed with any and all remedies available to it under law, this Agreement, and the other Loan Documents. Such remedies include but are not limited to the following: (a) Acceleration of Note. The County may cause all indebtedness of Borrower to the County under this Agreement and the Note, together with any accrued interest thereon, to become immediately due and payable. Borrower waives all right to presentment, demand, protest or notice of protest or dishonor. The County may proceed to enforce payment of the indebtedness and to exercise any or all rights afforded to the County as a creditor and secured party under the law including the Uniform Commercial Code, including foreclosure under the Deed of Trust. Borrower is liable to pay the County on demand all reasonable expenses, costs and fees (including, without limitation, reasonable attorney's fees and expenses) paid or incurred by the County in connection with the collection of the Loan and the preservation, maintenance, protection, sale, or other disposition of the security given for the Loan. (b) Specific Performance. The County has the right to mandamus or other suit, action or proceeding at law or in equity to require Borrower to perform its obligations and covenants under the Loan Documents or to enjoin acts on things that may be unlawful or in violation of the provisions of the Loan Documents. (c) Right to Cure at Borrower's Expense. The County has the right (but not the obligation) to cure any monetary default by Borrower under a loan other than the Loan. Upon demand therefor, Borrower shall reimburse the County for any funds advanced by the County to cure such monetary default by Borrower, together with interest thereon from the date of expenditure until the date of reimbursement at the Default Rate. Section 6.3 Right of Contest. Borrower may contest in good faith any claim, demand, levy, or assessment the assertion of which would constitute an Event of Default hereunder. Any such contest is to be prosecuted diligently and in a manner unprejudicial to the County or the rights of the County hereunder. Section 6.4 Remedies Cumulative. No right, power, or remedy given to the County by the terms of this Agreement or the other Loan Documents is intended to be exclusive of any other right, power, or remedy; and each and every such right, power, or remedy is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power, or remedy given to the County by the terms of any such instrument, or by any statute or otherwise against Borrower and any other person. Neither the failure nor any delay on the part of the County to exercise any such rights and remedies will operate as a waiver thereof, nor does any single or partial exercise by the County of any such right or remedy preclude any other or further exercise of such right or remedy, or any other right or remedy. 36 863\104\3592078.4 ARTICLE 7 GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 7.1 Relationship of Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement is to be interpreted or understood by any of the Parties, or by any third persons, as creating the relationship of employer and employee, principal and agent, limited or general partnership, or joint venture between the County and Borrower or its agents, employees or contractors, and Borrower will at all times be deemed an independent contractor and to be wholly responsible for the manner in which it or its agents, or both, perform the services required of it by the terms of this Agreement. Borrower has and retains the right to exercise full control of employment, direction, compensation, and discharge of all persons assisting in the performance of services under the Agreement. In regards to the rehabilitation and operation of the Development, Borrower is solely responsible for all matters relating to payment of its employees, including compliance with Social Security, withholding, and all other laws and regulations governing such matters, and must include requirements in each contract that contractors are solely responsible for similar matters relating to their employees. Borrower is solely responsible for its own acts and those of its agents and employees. Section 7.2 No Claims. Nothing contained in this Agreement creates or justifies any claim against the County by any person that Borrower may have employed or with whom Borrower may have contracted relative to the purchase of materials, supplies or equipment, or the furnishing or the performance of any work or services with respect to the purchase of the Property, the rehabilitation or operation of the Development, and Borrower shall include similar requirements in any contracts entered into for the rehabilitation or operation of the Development. Section 7.3 Amendments. No alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement is valid unless made in writing by the Parties. The County Director of the Department of Conservation and Development is authorized to execute on behalf of the County amendments to the Loan Documents or amended and restated Loan Documents as long as any discretionary change in the amount or terms of this Agreement is approved by the County's Board of Supervisors. Section 7.4 Indemnification. Borrower shall indemnify, defend and hold the County and its board members, supervisors, directors, officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns harmless against any and all claims, suits, actions, losses and liability of every kind, nature and description made against it and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) which arise out of or in connection with this Agreement, including but not limited to the purchase of the Property and the development, rehabilitation, marketing and operation of the Development, except to the extent such claim arises from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the County, its agents, and its employees. This obligation to indemnify survives termination of this Agreement, repayment of the Loan, and the reconveyance of the Deed of Trust. 37 863\104\3592078.4 Section 7.5 Non-Liability of County Officials, Employees and Agents. No member, official, employee or agent of the County is personally liable to Borrower in the event of any default or breach of this Agreement by the County or for any amount that may become due from the County pursuant to this Agreement. Section 7.6 No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no third party beneficiaries to this Agreement. Section 7.7 Discretion Retained By County. The County's execution of this Agreement in no way limits any discretion the County may have in the permit and approval process related to the rehabilitation of the Development. Section 7.8 Conflict of Interest. (a) Except for approved eligible administrative or personnel costs, no person described in Section 7.8(b) below who exercises or has exercised any functions or responsibilities with respect to the activities funded pursuant to this Agreement or who is in a position to participate in a decision-making process or gain inside information with regard to such activities, may obtain a financial interest or benefit from the activity, or have a financial interest in any contract, subcontract or agreement with respect thereto, or the proceeds thereunder, either for themselves or those with whom they have immediate family or business ties, during, or at any time after, such person's tenure. Borrower shall exercise due diligence to ensure that the prohibition in this Section 7.8(a) is followed. (b) The conflict of interest provisions of Section 7.8(a) above apply to any person who is an employee, agent, consultant, officer, or elected or appointed official of the County. (c) In accordance with California Government Code Section 1090 and the Political Reform Act, California Government Code section 87100 et seq., no person who is a director, officer, partner, trustee or employee or consultant of Borrower, or immediate family member of any of the preceding, may make or participate in a decision, made by the County or a County board, commission or committee, if it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will have a material effect on any source of income, investment or interest in real property of that person or Borrower. Interpretation of this section is governed by the definitions and provisions used in the Political Reform Act, California Government Code Section 87100 et seq., its implementing regulations manual and codes, and California Government Code Section 1090. Section 7.9 Notices, Demands and Communications. All notices required or permitted by any provision of this Agreement must be in writing and sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered by express delivery service, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, to the principal office of the Parties as follows: 38 863\104\3592078.4 County: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attention: Assistant Deputy Director Borrower: Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership c/o Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond 1535-A Fred Jackson Way Richmond, CA 94801 Attn: Executive Director Such written notices, demands and communications may be sent in the same manner to such other addresses as the affected party may from time to time designate by mail as provided in this Section. Receipt will be deemed to have occurred on the date shown on a written receipt as the date of delivery or refusal of delivery (or attempted delivery if undeliverable). Section 7.10 Applicable Law. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of California. Section 7.11 Parties Bound. Except as otherwise limited herein, this Agreement binds and inures to the benefit of the parties and their heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors, and assigns. This Agreement is intended to run with the land and to bind Borrower and its successors and assigns in the Property and the Development for the entire Term, and the benefit hereof is to inure to the benefit of the County and its successors and assigns. Section 7.12 Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions will continue in full force and effect unless the rights and obligations of the parties have been materially altered or abridged by such invalidation, voiding or unenforceability. Section 7.13 Force Majeure. In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by either party will not be deemed to be in default where delays or defaults are due to war, insurrection, strikes, lock- outs, riots, floods, earthquakes, fires, quarantine restrictions, freight embargoes, lack of transportation, or court order. An extension of time for any cause will be deemed granted if notice by the party claiming such extension is sent to the other within ten (10) days from the commencement of the cause and such extension of time is not rejected in writing by the other party within ten (10) days after receipt of the notice. In no event will the County be required to agree to cumulative delays in excess of one hundred eighty (180) days. 39 863\104\3592078.4 Section 7.14 County Approval. The County has authorized the County Director, Department of Conservation and Development to execute the Loan Documents and deliver such approvals or consents as are required by this Agreement, and to execute estoppel certificates concerning the status of the Loan and the existence of Borrower defaults under the Loan Documents. Section 7.15 Waivers. Any waiver by the County of any obligation or condition in this Agreement must be in writing. No waiver will be implied from any delay or failure by the County to take action on any breach or default of Borrower or to pursue any remedy allowed under this Agreement or applicable law. Any extension of time granted to Borrower to perform any obligation under this Agreement does not operate as a waiver or release from any of its obligations under this Agreement. Consent by the County to any act or omission by Borrower may not be construed to be consent to any other or subsequent act or omission or to waive the requirement for the County's written consent to future waivers. Section 7.16 Title of Parts and Sections. Any titles of the sections or subsections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and are to be disregarded in interpreting any part of the Agreement's provisions. Section 7.17 Entire Understanding of the Parties. The Loan Documents constitute the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the Loan. Section 7.18 Multiple Originals; Counterpart. This Agreement may be executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and may be signed in counterparts. Remainder of Page Left Intentionally Blank Signature page County Loan Agreement 863\104\3592078.4 40 The parties are entering into this Agreement as of the last date set forth below. COUNTY: COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California By: ____________________________________ John Kopchik Director, Department of Conservation and Development Date: February 15, 2024 APPROVED AS TO FORM: THOMAS L. GEIGER County Counsel By: ______________________ Kathleen Andrus Deputy County Counsel BORROWER: CHESLEY AVENUE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP a California limited partnership By: Chesley Avenue LLC, a California limited liability company, its general partner By: Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, its sole member and manager By: ____________________________ Don Gilmore, Executive Director Date: February 15, 2024 A-1 863\104\3592078.4 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY The land referred to is situated in the County of Contra Costa, City of Richmond, State of California, and is described as follows: Lots 8 through 28, Block 210, Map of Walls Second Addition, filed March 4, 1912, Map Book 6, Page 140, Contra Costa County Records. APN: 561-251-003-1 B-1 863\104\3592078.4 EXHIBIT B APPROVED DEVELOPMENT BUDGET C-1 863\104\3592078.4 EXHIBIT C NEPA MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page i 863\104\3592078.4 ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS ...............................................................................2 Section 1.1 Definitions................................................................................................... 2 Section 1.2 Exhibits ....................................................................................................... 8 ARTICLE 2 LOAN PROVISIONS .................................................................................................9 Section 2.1 Loan. ........................................................................................................... 9 Section 2.2 Interest......................................................................................................... 9 Section 2.3 Use of Loan Funds. ..................................................................................... 9 Section 2.4 Security. ...................................................................................................... 9 Section 2.5 Subordination. ............................................................................................. 9 Section 2.6 Conditions Precedent to Disbursement of Loan Funds for Rehabilitation. ........................................................................................... 10 Section 2.7 Conditions Precedent to Disbursement of Retention. ............................... 13 Section 2.8 Repayment Schedule. ................................................................................ 14 Section 2.9 Reports and Accounting of Residual Receipts.......................................... 15 Section 2.10 Non-Recourse. .......................................................................................... 15 ARTICLE 3 REHABILITATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT ....................................................16 Section 3.1 Permits and Approvals. ............................................................................. 16 Section 3.2 Bid Package. ............................................................................................. 16 Section 3.3 Construction Contract. .............................................................................. 16 Section 3.4 Construction Bonds. .................................................................................. 17 Section 3.5 Commencement of Construction. ............................................................. 17 Section 3.6 Completion of Construction. ..................................................................... 17 Section 3.7 Changes; Construction Pursuant to Plans and Laws. ................................ 17 Section 3.8 Prevailing Wages. ..................................................................................... 18 Section 3.9 Accessibility. ............................................................................................. 20 Section 3.10 Relocation. ................................................................................................ 20 Section 3.11 Equal Opportunity. .................................................................................... 21 Section 3.12 Minority and Women-Owned Contractors. .............................................. 21 Section 3.13 Progress Reports. ...................................................................................... 21 Section 3.14 Construction Responsibilities. .................................................................. 21 Section 3.15 Mechanics Liens, Stop Notices, and Notices of Completion.................... 21 Section 3.16 Inspections. ............................................................................................... 22 Section 3.17 Approved Development Budget; Revisions to Budget. ............................ 22 Section 3.18 Developer Fee. .......................................................................................... 23 Section 3.19 Partnership Management/Asset Fee. ......................................................... 23 Section 3.20 HOME Monitoring Fee. ............................................................................ 23 Section 3.21 NEPA Mitigation Requirements. .............................................................. 23 ARTICLE 4 LOAN REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................23 Section 4.1 Match Requirement. .................................................................................. 23 Section 4.2 Reserve Accounts...................................................................................... 23 Section 4.3 Financial Accountings and Post-Completion Audits. ............................... 24 Section 4.4 Approval of Annual Operating Budget. .................................................... 24 Section 4.5 Information. .............................................................................................. 24 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page ii 863\104\3592078.4 Section 4.6 County Audits. .......................................................................................... 24 Section 4.7 Hazardous Materials. ................................................................................ 25 Section 4.8 Maintenance; Damage and Destruction. ................................................... 27 Section 4.9 Fees and Taxes. ......................................................................................... 27 Section 4.10 Notices. ..................................................................................................... 28 Section 4.11 Operation of Development as Affordable Housing. ................................. 29 Section 4.12 Nondiscrimination..................................................................................... 29 Section 4.13 Insurance Requirements. ........................................................................... 29 Section 4.14 Covenants Regarding Approved Financing and Partnership Agreement. ................................................................................................ 30 ARTICLE 5 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF BORROWER ...........................31 Section 5.1 Representations and Warranties. ............................................................... 31 ARTICLE 6 DEFAULT AND REMEDIES ..................................................................................33 Section 6.1 Events of Default. ..................................................................................... 33 Section 6.2 Remedies. .................................................................................................. 34 Section 6.3 Right of Contest. ....................................................................................... 35 Section 6.4 Remedies Cumulative. .............................................................................. 35 ARTICLE 7 GENERAL PROVISIONS .......................................................................................36 Section 7.1 Relationship of Parties. ............................................................................. 36 Section 7.2 No Claims. ................................................................................................ 36 Section 7.3 Amendments. ............................................................................................ 36 Section 7.4 Indemnification. ........................................................................................ 36 Section 7.5 Non-Liability of County Officials, Employees and Agents...................... 37 Section 7.6 No Third Party Beneficiaries. ................................................................... 37 Section 7.7 Discretion Retained By County. ............................................................... 37 Section 7.8 Conflict of Interest. ................................................................................... 37 Section 7.9 Notices, Demands and Communications. ................................................. 37 Section 7.10 Applicable Law. ........................................................................................ 38 Section 7.11 Parties Bound. ........................................................................................... 38 Section 7.12 Severability. .............................................................................................. 38 Section 7.13 Force Majeure. .......................................................................................... 38 Section 7.14 County Approval. ...................................................................................... 39 Section 7.15 Waivers. .................................................................................................... 39 Section 7.16 Title of Parts and Sections. ....................................................................... 39 Section 7.17 Entire Understanding of the Parties. ......................................................... 39 Section 7.18 Multiple Originals; Counterpart. ............................................................... 39 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property EXHIBIT B Approved Development Budget EXHIBIT C NEPA Mitigation Requirements 863\104\3592078.4 DEVELOPMENT LOAN AGREEMENT Between COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA And CHESLEY AVENUE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP CHESLEY MUTUAL HOUSING dated February 15, 2024 863\104\3601306.3 1 RECORDING REQUESTED PURSUANT AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Assistant Deputy Director No fee for recording pursuant to Government Code Section 27383 and 27388.1 __________________________________________________________________________ INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENT (Chesley Mutual Housing) This Intercreditor Agreement (the "Agreement") is dated February 15, 2024, and is among the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation (the "City"), the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), and Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("Borrower"), with reference to the following facts: RECITALS A. Defined terms used but not defined in these recitals are as defined in Section 1 of this Agreement. B. Borrower is the owner of that certain real property located at 802 Chesley Avenue in the City of Richmond, County of Contra Costa, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit A (the "Property"). Borrower intends to rehabilitate the thirty (30) multifamily housing units currently existing on the Property, twenty-nine (29) of which will be for rental to extremely low and very low income households, including one (1) manager's unit (the "Development"). The Development, as well as all landscaping, roads and parking spaces on the Property and any additional improvements on the Property, are the "Improvements". C. Concurrently herewith the County is lending Borrower One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) of Home Investment Partnerships Act funds and Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($994,807) of Community Development Block Grant Program funds for a total loan of One Million Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seven Dollars ($1,994,807) (the "County Loan"). D. The County Loan is evidenced by the following documents dated of even date herewith (among others): (i) a Development Loan Agreement between the County and Borrower (the "County Loan Agreement"); (ii) a promissory note executed by Borrower for the benefit of the County in the amount of the County Loan ( the "County Note"); and (iii) a Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement, and Fixture Filing among Borrower, as trustor, 863\104\3601306.3 2 Old Republic Title Company, as trustee, and the County, as beneficiary, recorded against the Property concurrently herewith (the "County Deed of Trust"). E. The City of Richmond previously made a loan to Borrower in the amount of Two Hundred Twenty-Three Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($223,500) (the "City Loan"), evidenced by the following documents (among others): (i) a Loan Agreement between the City and Borrower dated December 1, 2003 (the "City Loan Agreement"); (ii) a Deed of Trust and Security Agreement dated December 1, 2003 and recorded against the Property on December 17, 2003 as instrument number 2003-0605380-00 (the "City Deed of Trust"), and (iii) a promissory note dated December 1, 2003, and executed by Borrower for the benefit of the City in the amount of the City Loan (the "City Note"). F. The former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Richmond (the "City RDA") previously made a loan to Borrower in the amount of Four Million Seven Hundred Forty-One Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-Two Dollars ($4,741,492) (the "City RDA Loan"), evidenced by the following documents (among others): (i) a Loan Agreement between the City RDA and Borrower dated December 1, 2003 (the "City RDA Loan Agreement"); (ii) a Deed of Trust with Absolute Assignment of Leases and Rents, Security Agreement and Fixture Filing dated December 1, 2003 and recorded against the Property on December 17, 2003 as instrument number 2003-0605378-00 (the "City RDA Deed of Trust"), and (iii) a promissory note dated December 1, 2003, and executed by Borrower for the benefit of the City RDA in the amount of the City RDA Loan (the "City RDA Note"). The City Deed of Trust and the City RDA Deed of Trust are collectively, the "City and Agency Deeds of Trust"). The City Note and the City RDA Note are collectively, the "City and Agency Notes"). The City is the successor agency to the City RDA. G. The documents evidencing the City Loan and the City RDA Loan currently require that the City RDA Loan be repaid from 95% of Residual Receipts and the City Loan be repaid from 5% of Residual Receipts. The City and the County desire to revise the division of Residual Receipts such that the City and County share prorata in 100% of Residual Receipts. H. The City and the County also desire to cause the City and Agency Deeds of Trust and the County Deed of Trust (together, the "Deeds of Trust") to be equal in lien priority, and to share prorata in the proceeds of any foreclosure, condemnation or insurance claim as further set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Definitions. The following terms have the following meanings: (a) "Annual City Loan Payment" has the meaning in Section 2(b). (b) "Annual County Loan Payment" has the meaning in Section 2(a). (c) "Annual Operating Expenses" means for each calendar year, the following costs reasonably and actually incurred for operation and maintenance of the Development: 863\104\3601306.3 3 i. Fees paid to the County as the issuer of County of Contra Costa Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Chesley Apartments) 2003, Series E and Series F; ii. property taxes and assessments imposed on the Development; iii. debt service currently due on a non-optional basis (excluding debt service due from residual receipts or surplus cash of the Development) on Approved Financing; iv. on-site service provider fees for tenant social services, provided the County and City have approved, in writing, the plan and budget for such services before such services begin; v. property management fees and reimbursements, on–site property management office expenses, and salaries of property management and maintenance personnel, not to exceed amounts that are standard in the industry and which are pursuant to a management contract approved by the County and the City; vi. the Partnership Management/Asset Fee; vii. fees for accounting, audit, and legal services incurred by Borrower's general partner in the asset management of the Development, not to exceed amounts that are standard in the industry, to the extent such fees are not included in the Partnership Management/Asset Fee; viii. premiums for insurance required for the Improvements to satisfy the requirements of any lender of Approved Financing; ix. utility services not paid for directly by tenants, including water, sewer, and trash collection; x. maintenance and repair expenses and services; xi. any annual license or certificate of occupancy fees required for operation of the Development; xii. security services; xiii. advertising and marketing; xiv. cash deposited into the Replacement Reserve Account in the amount set forth in Section 4.2(a) of the County Loan Agreement; xv. cash deposited into the Operating Reserve Account to maintain the amount set forth in Section 4.2(b) of the County Loan Agreement (excluding amounts deposited to initially capitalize the account); xvi. payment of any deferred portion of Developer Fee (without interest), not to exceed the amount set forth in Section 3.18 of the County Loan Agreement; xvii. extraordinary operating costs specifically approved in writing by 863\104\3601306.3 4 the County and the City; xviii. the HOME Monitoring Fee; and xix. payments of deductibles in connection with casualty insurance claims not normally paid from reserves, the amount of uninsured losses actually replaced, repaired or restored, and not normally paid from reserves, and other ordinary and reasonable operating expenses approved in writing by the County and the City and not listed above. Annual Operating Expenses do not include the following: depreciation, amortization, depletion or other non-cash expenses, initial deposits to capitalize a reserve account, any amount expended from a reserve account, and any capital cost associated with the Development. (d) "Approved Financing" means all of the following loans, grants, equity, and operating subsidy obtained by Borrower and approved by the County and the City for the purpose of financing the acquisition of the Property and the construction of the Development in addition to the County Loan and the City Loan: i. loan from the Housing Trust Silicon Valley in the amount of Two Million Eight Hundred Twenty-Seven Thousand Ninety-Eight Dollars ($2,827,098). (e) "Borrower" has the meaning set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. (f) "City" has the meaning set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. (g) "City and Agency Deeds of Trust" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph F of the Recitals. (h) "City Loan" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph E of the Recitals. (i) "City Loan Agreement " has the meaning set forth in Paragraph E of the Recitals. (j) "City Loan Prorata Percentage" means the result, expressed as a percentage, obtained by dividing the original principal amount of the City Loan by the sum of the original principal amounts of (i) the County Loan, (ii) the City RDA Loan, and (iii) the City Loan. (k) "City Note" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph E of the Recitals. (l) "City and Agency Notes" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph F of the Recitals. (m) "City RDA Loan" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph F of the Recitals. (n) "City RDA Loan Agreement " has the meaning set forth in Paragraph F of the Recitals. 863\104\3601306.3 5 (o) "City RDA Loan Prorata Percentage" means the result, expressed as a percentage, obtained by dividing the amount of the City RDA Loan by the sum of (i) the County Loan, (ii) the City RDA Loan, and (iii) the City Loan, to the extent such funds have been or are disbursed. (p) "City RDA Note" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph F of the Recitals. (q) "Completion Date" means the date a final certificate of occupancy, or equivalent document (such as a construction permit sign off for rehabilitation projects) is issued by the City to certify that the Development may be legally occupied. (r) "County" has the meaning set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. (s) "County Deed of Trust" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (t) "County Loan" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph C of the Recitals. (u) "County Loan Agreement" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (v) "County Loan Prorata Percentage" means the result, expressed as a percentage, obtained by dividing the amount of the County Loan by the sum of (i) the County Loan, (ii) the City RDA Loan, and (iii) the City Loan, to the extent such funds have been or are disbursed. (w) "County Note" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph D of the Recitals. (x) "Deeds of Trust" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph H of the Recitals. (y) "Default Rate" means a rate of interest equal to the lesser of the maximum rate permitted by law and ten percent (10%) per annum. (z) "Developer Fee" has the meaning set forth in Section 3.18 of the County Loan Agreement. (aa) "Development" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (bb) "Enforcing Party" has the meaning set forth in Section 6(b). (cc) "Foreclosure Net Proceeds" means the proceeds that result from a foreclosure, or any other action, whether judicial or non-judicial, less (i) all amounts paid to any senior lien holder, and (ii) expenses incurred by a lender that is a party to this Agreement in connection with such foreclosure or other action. (dd) "Gross Revenue" means for each calendar year, all revenue, income, receipts, and other consideration actually received from the operation and leasing of the Development. Gross Revenue includes, but is not limited to: 863\104\3601306.3 6 i. all rents, fees and charges paid by tenants; ii. Section 8 payments and other rental or operating subsidy payments received for the dwelling units; iii. deposits forfeited by tenants; iv. all cancellation fees; v. price index adjustments and any other rental adjustments to leases or rental agreements; vi. net proceeds from vending and laundry room machines; vii. the proceeds of business interruption or similar insurance not paid to senior lenders; viii. the proceeds of casualty insurance not used to rebuild the Development and not paid to senior lenders; and ix. condemnation awards for a taking of part or all of the Development for a temporary period. Gross Revenue does not include tenants' security deposits, loan proceeds, unexpended amounts (including interest) in any reserve account, required deposits to reserve accounts, capital contributions or similar advances. (ee) "HOME Monitoring Fee" has the meaning set forth in Section 3.20 of the County Loan Agreement. (ff) "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. (gg) "Improvements" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (hh) "Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts" means one hundred percent (100%) of Residual Receipts. (ii) "Partnership Agreement" means the agreement between Borrower's general partner and limited partner that governs the operation and organization of Borrower as a California limited partnership. (jj) "Partnership/Asset Fee" means partnership management fees (including any asset management fees) payable to the partners of Borrower, in the amounts approved by the County as set forth in Section 3.19 of the County Loan Agreement. (kk) "Property" has the meaning set forth in Paragraph B of the Recitals. (ll) "Residual Receipts" means for each calendar year, the amount by which Gross Revenue exceeds Annual Operating Expenses. 863\104\3601306.3 7 (mm) "Statement of Residual Receipts" means an itemized statement of Residual Receipts. (nn) "Term" means the period of time that commences on the date of this Agreement, and expires, unless sooner terminated in accordance with this Agreement, on the fifty-fifth (55th) anniversary of the Completion Date; provided, however, if a record of the Completion Date cannot be located or established, the Term will expire on the fifty-seventh (57th) anniversary of this Agreement. 2. Annual Payments to County and City. (a) County Loan. i. Commencing on May 1, 2024, and on May 1 of each year thereafter during the Term, Borrower shall make a loan payment to the County of the County Loan in an amount equal to the County Loan Prorata Percentage of Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts (each such payment, an "Annual County Loan Payment"). The County shall apply all Annual County Loan Payments to the County Loan as follows: (1) first, to accrued interest, and (2) second, to principal. ii. Borrower shall repay the County Loan pursuant to the terms of the County Loan Agreement and the County Note. In the event of any conflict between the repayment terms and provisions of the County Loan Agreement and this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement apply. The County may not consent to any amendment or waiver of the terms of the County Loan Agreement or the County Note if such amendment or waiver could reasonably be deemed to materially adversely affect the City, without the City's prior written approval, which the City may withhold in its sole discretion. (b) City Loan. i. Commencing on May 1, 2024, and on May 1 of each year thereafter during the Term, Borrower shall make a loan payment to the City in an amount equal the City Loan Prorata Percentage of Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts (each such payment, an "Annual City Loan Payment"). The City shall apply all Annual City Loan Payments to the City Loan as follows: (1) first, to accrued interest, if any, and (2) second, to principal for the City Loan. ii. Borrower shall repay the City Loan pursuant to the terms of the City Loan Agreement and the City Note. In the event of any conflict between the repayment terms of the City Loan Agreement, City Note, and this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement apply. The City may not consent to any amendment or waiver of the terms of the City Loan Agreement or the City Note, if such amendment or waiver could reasonably be deemed to materially adversely affect the County, without the County's prior written approval, which the County may withhold in its sole discretion. (c) City RDA Loan. i. Commencing on May 1, 2024, and on May 1 of each year thereafter during the Term, Borrower shall make a loan payment to the City in an amount equal 863\104\3601306.3 8 the City RDA Loan Prorata Percentage of Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts (each such payment, an "Annual City RDA Loan Payment"). The City shall apply all Annual City RDA Loan Payments to the City RDA Loan as follows: (1) first, to accrued interest, if any, and (2) second, to principal for the City RDA Loan. ii. Borrower shall repay the City RDA Loan pursuant to the terms of the City RDA Loan Agreement and the City RDA Note. In the event of any conflict between the repayment terms of the City RDA Loan Agreement, City RDA Note, and this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement apply. The City may not consent to any amendment or waiver of the terms of the City RDA Loan Agreement or the City RDA Note, if such amendment or waiver could reasonably be deemed to materially adversely affect the County, without the County's prior written approval, which the County may withhold in its sole discretion. 3. Reports and Accounting of Residual Receipts. (a) Annual Reports. In connection with the Annual County Loan Payment, the Annual City Loan Payment, and the Annual City RDA Loan Payment, Borrower shall furnish to the City and the County: i. The Statement of Residual Receipts for the relevant period. The first Statement of Residual Receipts will cover the period that begins on January 1 2023, and ends on December 31 of that same year. Subsequent statements of Residual Receipts will cover the twelve-month period that ends on December 31 of each year; ii. A statement from the independent public accountant that audited Borrower's financial records for the relevant period, which statement must confirm that Borrower's calculation of the Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts is accurate based on Operating Income and Annual Operating Expenses; and iii. Any additional documentation reasonably required by the County or the City to substantiate Borrower's calculation of Lenders' Share of Residual Receipts. (b) Books and Records. Borrower shall keep and maintain at the principal place of business of Borrower set forth in Section 10 below, or elsewhere with the written consent of the County and the City, full, complete and appropriate books, record and accounts relating to the Development, including all books, records and accounts necessary or prudent to evidence and substantiate in full detail Borrower's calculation of Residual Receipts and disbursements of Residual Receipts. Borrower shall cause all books, records and accounts relating to its compliance with the terms, provisions, covenants and conditions of this Agreement to be kept and maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied, and to be consistent with requirements of this Agreement, which provide for the calculation of Residual Receipts on a cash basis. Borrower shall cause all books, records, and accounts to be open to and available for inspection by the County and the City, their auditors or other authorized representatives at reasonable intervals during normal business hours. Borrower shall cause copies of all tax returns and other reports that Borrower may be required to furnish to any government agency to be open for inspection by the County and the City at all reasonable times at the place that the books, records and accounts of Borrower are kept. Borrower shall preserve records on which any statement of Residual Receipts is based for a 863\104\3601306.3 9 period of not less than five (5) years after such statement is rendered, and for any period during which there is an audit undertaken pursuant to subsection (c) below then pending. (c) County and City Audits. i. The receipt by the County or the City of any statement pursuant to subsection (a) above or any payment by Borrower or acceptance by the County or the City of any loan repayment for any period does not bind the County or the City as to the correctness of such statement or such payment. The County or the City or any designated agent or employee of the County or the City is entitled at any time to audit the Residual Receipts and all books, records, and accounts pertaining thereto. The County and/or the City may conduct such audit during normal business hours at the principal place of business of Borrower and other places where records are kept. Immediately after the completion of an audit, the County or the City, as the case may be, shall deliver a copy of the results of the audit to Borrower. ii. If it is determined as a result of an audit that there has been a deficiency in a loan repayment to the County and/or the City, then such deficiency will become immediately due and payable, with interest at the Default Rate from the date the deficient amount should have been paid. In addition, if the audit determines that Residual Receipts have been understated for any year by the greater of (i) $2,500, and (ii) an amount that exceeds five percent (5%) of the Residual Receipts, then, in addition to paying the deficiency with interest, Borrower shall pay all of the costs and expenses connected with the audit and review of Borrower's accounts and records incurred by the County and/or the City. 4. Deeds of Trust. Notwithstanding the fact that the City and Agency Deeds of Trust recorded prior to the County Deed of Trust, the Deeds of Trust are equal in lien priority. 5. Notice of Default. (a) The County and the City shall each notify the other promptly upon declaring a default or learning of the occurrence of any material event of default, or any event which with the lapse of time would become a material event of default, under its respective loan documents for the City Loan, the City RDA Loan, and the County Loan. (b) Neither the City nor the County may make a demand for payment from Borrower or accelerate the City and Agency Notes, or the County Note, as the case may be, or commence enforcement of any of the rights and remedies under the City and Agency Deeds of Trust or the County Deed of Trust, as the case may be, until the date that is five (5) business days following delivery of written notice by the party enforcing its rights (the "Enforcing Party") to the other party stating that a "default" (as defined in the relevant Deed of Trust) has occurred and is continuing and that the Enforcing party is requesting the other party's assistance in foreclosure pursuant to Section 6. 6. Cooperation in Foreclosure. (a) If there is a default under the City Loan, the City RDA Loan and/or County Loan, after expiration of any applicable cure periods, the party who is the lender on the defaulted loan shall cooperate with the other lender that is a party to this Agreement to coordinate any foreclosure proceedings or other appropriate remedies. 863\104\3601306.3 10 (b) Neither the County nor the City may contest the validity, perfection, priority, or enforceability of the lien granted to the other party by a deed of trust secured by the Property. Notwithstanding any failure of a party to perfect its lien on the Property or any other defect in the security interests or obligations owing to such party, the priority and rights as between the lenders that are parties to this Agreement are as set forth in this Agreement. 7. Foreclosure Proceeds. If there is a foreclosure, or any other action, whether judicial or nonjudicial, under one or all of the Deeds of Trust (including the giving of a deed in lieu of foreclosure), the proceeds resulting from such foreclosure or action will be first used to pay (i) all amounts paid to any senior lien holder, and (ii) expenses incurred by the County, the City, or both, in connection with such foreclosure or other action. After such payments (i) the City is entitled to the result obtained by multiplying the City Loan Prorata Percentage by the Foreclosure Net Proceeds and the City RDA Loan Prorata Percentage by the Foreclosure Net Proceeds, and (ii) the County is entitled to the result obtained by multiplying the County Loan Prorata Percentage by the Foreclosure Net Proceeds. 8. Insurance and Condemnation Proceeds. If, as a result of having made the City RDA Loan, the City Loan, and the County Loan, the City and County are entitled to insurance or condemnation proceeds, they will share such proceeds as follows: (i) the City is entitled to the result obtained by multiplying the City Loan Prorata Percentage by the available proceeds and the City RDA Loan Prorata Percentage by the available proceeds, and (ii) the County is entitled to the result obtained by multiplying the County Loan Prorata Percentage by the available proceeds. 9. Title to Property. If, as a result of having made the City RDA Loan, the City Loan and the County Loan, either the City or the County is entitled to title to the Property as a consequence of Borrower's default, then title is to be held in tenancy in common by the City and the County in accordance with their respective prorata share of the Foreclosure Net Proceeds. Subsequent decisions to hold or sell the Property will be made by joint decision of the City and the County. 10. Notices. All notices required or permitted by any provision of this Agreement must be in writing and sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered by express delivery service, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, to the principal office of the parties as follows: City: City of Richmond 450 Civic Center Plaza Richmond, CA 94804 Attention: City Manager County: County of Contra Costa Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, California 94553 Attention: Assistant Deputy Director 863\104\3601306.3 11 Borrower: Chesley Avenue Limited Partnership c/o Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond 1535 A Fred Jackson Way Richmond, CA 94801 Attention Executive Director Such written notices, demands, and communications may be sent in the same manner to such other addresses as the affected party may from time to time designate as provided in this Section. Receipt will be deemed to have occurred on the date marked on a written receipt as the date of delivery or refusal of delivery (or attempted delivery if undeliverable). 11. Titles. Any titles of the sections or subsections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and are to be disregarded in interpreting any part of the Agreement's provisions. 12. California Law. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of California. 13. Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions will continue in full force and effect unless the rights and obligations of the parties have been materially altered or abridged by such invalidation, voiding or unenforceability. 14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. 15. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and may be signed in counterparts. 16. Amendments. This Agreement may not be modified except by written instrument executed by and amongst the parties. [signatures on following page] Signature Page Intercreditor Agreement 863\104\3601306.3 12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. BORROWER: CHESLEY AVENUE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP a California limited partnership By: Chesley Avenue LLC, a California limited liability company, its general partner By: Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, its sole member and manager By: ____________________________ Don Gilmore, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: THOMAS L. GEIGER County Counsel By: Kathleen Andrus Deputy County Counsel COUNTY: COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California By: ____________________________ John Kopchik Director, Department of Conservation and Development Signatures continue on following page Signature Page Intercreditor Agreement 863\104\3601306.3 13 ATTEST: By:___________________ Pamela Christian, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: _______________________________ _____________________, City Attorney CITY: CITY OF RICHMOND, a municipal corporation By: ____________________________ Shasa Curl, City Manager 863\104\3601306.3 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. 863\104\3601306.3 15 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. 863\104\3601306.3 16 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF __________________ ) On ____________________, before me, ___________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared ______________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ______________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Notary Public A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. A-1 863\104\3601306.3 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION The land referred to is situated in the County of Contra Costa, City of Richmond, State of California, and is described as follows: Lots 8 through 28, Block 210, Map of Walls Second Addition, filed March 4, 1912, Map Book 6, Page 140, Contra Costa County Records. APN: 561-251-003-1 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0505 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:12/20/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a funding agreement between the East Bay Regional Park District and Contra Costa County to disburse $201,580 in Navy Mitigation Funds to complete final design and environmental permitting for the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure Project in Martinez, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (No General Fund impact) Attachments:1. Exhibit A - Navy Mitigation Fund Expend Plan Amended Feb 9 2010, 2. Exhibit B - Letter, Request from EBRPD for Navy Mitigation Funds, 3. Exhibit C - Great CA Delta Trail Master Plan (Excerpt), 4. Exhibit D - DRAFT Co-op Agreement, EBRPD Great CA Gap Closure project - planning funds Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Funding Agreement to Disburse Navy Mitigation Funds to Complete Final Design and Environmental Permitting for the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure project in Martinez ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a funding agreement between the East Bay Regional Park District and Contra Costa County to disburse $201,580 in Navy Mitigation Funds to complete final design and environmental permitting for the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure Project in Martinez. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact to the General Fund. (100% Navy Mitigation Fund) BACKGROUND: In the early 1990s, the United States Navy closed vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle access on the Port Chicago Highway through the Concord Naval Weapons Station. To mitigate this closure, the Navy paid the County $5 million for transportation improvements in the Port Chicago, Clyde, and Bay Point areas. As of 2008, $4 million had not been spent. With accumulated interest, the fund had grown to $8.6 million. To make use of these funds, in June 2008, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan, which was amended in 2010 (Expenditure Plan - Exhibit A). The current balance of the fund (as of January 2024) is $5,042,311. The Expenditure Plan identified a number of transportation improvement activities and projects, along with the amount to be allocated to each activity/project. One of these activities is “planning and environmental impact CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0505,Version:2 review for the Great California Delta Trail”. This activity is defined as follows in the Expenditure Plan: 7) Planning and environmental impact review for Great California Delta Trail Project involves planning and environmental review for the portions of the Great California Delta Trail within Contra Costa County (the overall trail will eventually ring the Delta Region, connecting to the Bay Trail in Martinez). Participants will include the East Bay Regional Park District, Contra Costa County, Delta Protection Commission, and the City of Pittsburg. Navy Fund Allocation: $350,000 (full funding) Lead Agency: East Bay Regional Park District ($310,000) Delta Protection Commission ($40,000) The Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan identifies a total of $350,000 to be allocated for planning and environmental impact review for the Great California Delta Trail, $310,000 of which is specifically allocated to the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD). EBRPD has previously expended $108,420 on other planning activities. EBRPD wishes to enter into a funding agreement (Exhibit B) with the County to receive the remaining $201,580 to conduct final design and environmental permitting for the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure Project (“Activity”), specifically a proposed segment of the Great California Delta Trail between Berellessa Street and the Nedjedly Staging Area in Martinez, which will also be a segment of the Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail and the San Francisco Bay Trail. A map of the trail segment which the Activity will be conducted is included in EBRPD’s request to the County. The Activity is consistent with recommendations in the 2022 Great California Delta Trail Master Plan (Exhibit C). EBRPD will provide the County with the opportunity to review and comment on activity deliverables. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the funding agreement is not adopted, the East Bay Regional Park District will not have the funding to complete final design and environmental permitting for the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure Project in Martinez. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Susan A. Bonilla, District IV Department of Conservation and Development Public Works Department Adopted by the Board of Supervisors on June 17, 2008 Amended by the Board of Supervisors on February 9, 2010 1 Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan Summary of funding allocations Project numbers do not indicate priority 1) 2nd left-turn lane from westbound Evora Road onto southbound Willow Pass Road. Project will reduce morning backup at the intersection by approximately 500 feet; traffic signal at same intersection to be paid for by business park developer. Navy Fund Allocation: $1.3 million (full funding) Lead Agency: Contra Costa County 2) Bailey Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Improvements (from Delta DeAnza Regional Trail near Mims Avenue, past freeway ramps to BART station driveway) Project will improve walking and bicycling conditions along Bailey Road, particularly improving conditions for Bel Air Elementary students, BART station users, Tri Delta Transit bus stop users, and future residents of the planned Orbisonia Heights mixed-use, transit-oriented development project across Bailey Road from the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station. Navy Fund Allocation: $1.5 million (partial/full funding – costs to be determined) Lead Agency: Contra Costa County / Caltrans / Tri Delta Transit (depending on particular projects identified in planning phase) 3) Clyde Union Pacific Right-of-Way Trail Project will build a trail along an unused railroad corridor alongisde Port Chicago Highway through Clyde, and establish a trust fund to cover long-term maintenance needs for the trail. Navy Fund Allocation: $1.5 million (full funding) Lead Agency: Contra Costa County 4) Bailey-Bella Vista Connector Trail Project will improve the surface and appearance of the existing trail between Bella Vista Avenue and Bailey Road near Bel Air Elementary School and establish a trust fund for long-term maintenance needs. Navy Fund Allocation: $500,000 (full funding) Lead Agency: Contra Costa County 5) Driftwood Drive Landscaping Improvements Project will restore Driftwood Drive landscaping that was financed by the first Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan as a connecting walkway from the neighborhood to the Delta DeAnza Regional Trail and waterfront) Navy Fund Allocation: $750,000 (full funding) Lead Agency: Contra Costa County 2 6) Bay Point Waterfront Park Access Improvements Project will provide easier access, including access for disabled persons to newly established waterfront park west of McAvoy Harbor. Project is one of the recommendations in the Bay Point Waterfront Redevelopment Plan. Navy Fund Allocation: $450,000 (full funding) Lead Agencies: East Bay Regional Park District / Contra Costa County 7) Planning and environmental impact review for Great California Delta Trail Project involves planning and environmental review for the portions of the Great California Delta Trail within Contra Costa County (the overall trail will eventually ring the Delta Region, connecting to the Bay Trail in Martinez). Participants will include the East Bay Regional Park District, Contra Costa County, Delta Protection Commission, and the City of Pittsburg. Navy Fund Allocation: $350,000 (full funding) Lead Agency: East Bay Regional Park District ($310,000) Delta Protection Commission ($40,000) 8) Build Great California Delta Trail from Bay Point Waterfront Park to Clyde, Concord and Martinez Project will provide seed money for construction of one segment of the trail. Trail alignment will be determined through the planning project described above in Project #7. Navy Fund Allocation: $1 million (partial funding) Lead Agency: East Bay Regional Park District 9) Build Great California Delta Trail from Bay Point Waterfront Park to Pittsburg Project will provide seed money for construction of one segment of the trail. Navy Fund Allocation: $1 million (partial funding) Lead Agency: East Bay Regional Park District Total Allocations: $8.35 million 3 The graphic above was developed by the Contra Costa County Public Works Department, April 2008. 4 Benefits of the Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan 2008 Update • This plan includes a balance of project types (commuter traffic relief, pedestrian/bicycle safety, trail construction, trail landscaping and long-term maintenance, waterfront access). • Most of the projects included in this plan are relatively inexpensive (most less than $2 million) and most of them therefore can be fully funded by the Navy Mitigation Fund. • Most of the projects in this plan can be accomplished in the next few years. Construction of the Great California Delta Trail segments likely will take longer, due to the amount of planning, potential right-of-way acquisition, and additional funding that will be required. Status of the 1991 Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan • Delta DeAnza Regional Trail Plus Feeder Trails -- $1million allocation Status: numerous trails were built including the segment of the Delta DeAnza Regional Trail over the Willow Pass. The $1 million trail allocation was spent. • Evora Road Extension to Concord -- $4 million allocation Status: not built due to objections from City of Concord. Most of the $4 million remains unspent (a small portion, described below, was used for studies.) Interest has increased this amount of $8.6 million as of May 2008. • Transportation studies and planning -- $235,000 allocation Status: several studies were completed, including studies for the trails and a rail transit study. 5 Comments on the Draft Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan Staff of the Community Development Department and the Public Works Department reviewed the Draft Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan at three public meetings: March 18, 2008 – Town Hall Meeting convened by Supervisor Glover, at the Ambrose Recreation and Park District Building in Bay Point; May 6, 2008 – bimonthly meeting of the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council’s Transportation Area Committee; and May 6, 2008 – monthly meeting of the County Service Area M-16 (Clyde Parks) Summaries of the comments and questions from each of these meetings are presented in the following pages. Also included is a summary of comments from the kick-off meeting for the planning process that was convened in April 2007 at Calvary Temple on Evora Road. This meeting was held to gather public input about potential projects for the plan. 6 April 24, 2007: Suggestions from Town Hall meeting at Calvary Temple, Evora Road, Concord (Meeting convened by Supervisor Glover and Supervisor Bonilla to kick off the process) 1. Re-open Port Chicago Highway 2. Trail along Contra Costa Canal in Clyde 3. Evora Road Widening from Baypoint to Concord 4. Comprehensive road and trail plan developed with the MAC/TAC/PAC 5. The Great California Delta Trail 6. Clyde Feeder Trail on Union Pacific Railroad property (purchase of right of way and trail construction after Union Pacific cleans up the property) 7. Set-aside some funds in a trust account to be used as a maintenance fund for existing trail maintenance 8. Marina Trails – such as boardwalks 9. Bus Service Bay Point to Concord 10. Construct additional trails to better connect existing trails 11. Improve throughway roads through Baypoint 12. Construct a park at the trailhead of the Great California Delta Trail 13. Widen Evora Road and provide a bike trail 14. Interest from the trust account should be used for the Evora Road Extension 15. Provide alternate bike route to eliminate bicyclists having to use SR4 between Willow Pass Road and Port Chicago Highway 16. Other funding sources should be explored to construct the Delta Trail 17. Construct a bikeway on the north side of SR4 to connect to the existing Delta DeAnza Trail and construct another bikeway further from the freeway towards the shoreline. 7 18. Road improvements (Willow Pass Road, Bailey Road) 19. Redevelopment plan for Bay Point Waterfront (local roads and trails) March 18, 2008: Comments on the Draft Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan from Bay Point Town Hall meeting convened by Supervisor Glover at Ambrose Recreation and Park District office, Bay Point 1. There are graffiti-covered freight railroad cars across from my home in Shore Acres, who do I need to talk to, to get them moved? [Staff asked her to provide more specific info by phone or e-mail and he will try to find out whose rail cars they are] 2. If Concord would move the golf course, it would allow for the Evora Road Extension. 3. The proposed two left-turn lanes on Evora will cause traffic jams as people try to merge from the left one to the right one to get onto the freeway ramp, and the stop sign is better than a new traffic signal because cars move through it better. [Staff explained some of the operational details of how the signal and the turn lanes would operate.] 4. Get rid of the pedestrian tunnel. 5. We need to build schools in Bay Point. 6. The plan doesn’t provide enough traffic relief, too much money on trails. When Port Chicago Highway closed, we lost a road. We need to get a road back. 7. Get rid of the curving “free right” freeway off-ramp from SR 4 westbound to Bailey southbound; have all Bailey traffic use the other off-ramp, come to the traffic signal and then turn left or right onto Bailey. This will eliminate the need for the pedestrian tunnel. 8. Landscape the Bay Point cloverleaf, it’s an entrance to the community and it should look nice. 9. We need signal timing improvements along Willow Pass Road. 10. Trail safety surveillance is needed. 11. The pedestrian tunnel route doesn’t work for wheelchair users, who can’t get up the hill to get to BART. 12. Make public transit more accessible. 13. Port Chicago Highway was the only flat route for bicyclists between Bay Point and Concord. The draft plan would replace it with another flat route, which bicyclists want. 8 14. The Great California Delta Trail is now part of the East Bay Regional Park District’s Master Plan. 15. Oak Hills community supports the Great California Delta Trail. 16. The Bailey pedestrian/bicycle safety projects don’t mitigate the loss of the Port Chicago Highway. 17. Use the Bailey funds for the Clyde trail linkage to the Delta Trail. 18. The mitigation money should be used for roads, period. 19. The draft plan provides a good mix of projects and meets the purpose of the Navy Mitigation Fund. May 6, 2008: Comments on Draft Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan from the Transportation Area Committee of the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council 1. Paratransit service for senior citizens isn’t good enough, needs to be improved. The rules for riding are too strict. 2. The fund is being used to pay for things that other entities should have paid for. BART should have paid for the Bailey Road pedestrian safety improvements, homebuilders should have paid for the landscaping along Driftwood Drive, and the homebuilders should pay for the extra left-turn lane on Evora Road at Willow Pass Road. Navy Mitigation Funds shouldn’t have to be used for those. 3. Oak Hills Community Group and the Friends of the Delta Trail both support the expenditure plan including the recommendations for the Great California Delta Trail. The plan meets the goals and the funds will be well spent. 4. Ambrose Recreation and Park District supports the plan. 5. The proposed plan wastes a lot of money. Why should Driftwood Drive landscaping be paid for? The homeowners should pay for that. The left turn lane on Evora and the Bailey Road pedestrian improvements seem like good ideas. 6. Some trails are closed, like the one behind Casa de Serena senior citizens’ facility. It’s closed so it can’t be used. 7. We shouldn’t do any of the recommended projects except the Evora Road Extension. We should wait and see if the City of Concord builds it, and if they do, then we can use the Navy Mitigation Fund for these other things. 9 8. Friends of the Delta Trail says we need this plan and we support it. 9. A question was asked as to whether the Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan would bring more revenue to Bay Point. County staff and staff of the East Bay Regional Park District responded to this question. May 6, 2008: Comments on the Draft Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan from County Service Area M-16 (Clyde Parks) 1. This sounds like an opportunity to landscape the entrance to Clyde, similar to what Concord has done on some of their streets. We could put trees up and have an attractive entryway to the community. 2. A question was asked to whether the County still intended to extend two local streets westward to Port Chicago Highway. Public Works staff responded. 3. A question will be asked as to whether there will be parking for users of the new trail. Staff will consider this as we plan the access to the trail. 4. A question was asked as to whether utility poles would be moved or undergrounded as part of the project. Staff will consider this as trail planning is conducted. 5. Port Chicago Highway is a drag strip. We need more enforcement of speeding, and we should reduce the speed limit. 6. A question was asked about the width of the UP right-of-way. Staff responded the right-of-way is 60 feet, but only 8 to 10 feet will be paved. This is a typical trail width. 7. Several comments were made about flooding. Public Works will look into this. 8. The Clyde trail should connect to the Great California Delta Trail. 9. We should begin planning the trail now, we don’t need to wait until all the interagency matters are settled. 10. A question was asked whether Concord will expand Port Chicago Highway to support the new growth that will come in with the Reuse Project. Staff will look into this. 11. A question was asked about the chances that Port Chicago Highway will be reopened. Residents indicated they wouldn’t want it to be reopened. Staff replied that reopening is not likely. 10 August 28, 2023 Robert Sarmiento Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Transportation Planning Section RE: Request for $201,580 of Navy Mitigation Funds to Complete Final Design and Environmental Permitting for the Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure project in Martinez Dear Mr. Sarmiento, In 1989, Contra Costa County received funding from the Navy to mitigate the loss of pedestrian, cyclist, and vehicular access to the Port Chicago Highway in the Naval Weapons Station. The Navy Mitigation Expenditure Plan 2008 Update Item #7 sets aside $310,000 for EBRPD to complete “Planning and Environmental Impact Review for Great California Delta Trail.” Project work involves planning and environmental review for the portions of the Great California Delta Trail within Contra Costa County. The East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) is requesting $201,580 in Navy Mitigation funds to complete final design and environmental permitting for the Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure project in Martinez. In accordance with the expenditure plan, the proposed project closes a .5-mile gap in the Great California Delta Trail, San Francisco Bay Trail, and Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail. The project will construct a shared-use path along an agreed-upon easement in Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way between the Nejedly Staging Area in EBRPD’s Carquinez Regional Shoreline and Berrellesa Street in the City of Martinez. Upon completion of this Class I shared-use gap closure project, Martinez residents will have interconnected, safe, separated bicycle and pedestrian access to continuous trail and park connections directly in Martinez and the ability to bicycle or walk to jobs, employment opportunities, commercial destinations, and parks around the Carquinez Strait and the Greater Bay Area. Current status: 65% designs have been completed. Once approved by UPRR, our consultant can complete 100% PS&E. The determination has been made that CEQA MND completed in 2003 can be revalidated through an addendum. A recent Federal grant award for the construction phase has triggered the NEPA requirement. 100% PS&E and CEQA/NEPA is expected to be completed by end of 2024. The construction phase is currently fully funded, based on current estimates. Construction would begin in 2025. See proposed budget below: Task Amount 100% Plans, Specifications and Estimates $100,000 CEQA/NEPA $101,580 TOTAL $201,580 A draft cooperative funding agreement is attached for your review. Please contact me if you have nay questions at (510) 544-2204 or khornbeck@ebparks.org. Sincerely, Katy Hornbeck Grants Manager, East Bay Regional Park District Source: Google Earth, 2020 Martinez Bay Trail Project East Bay Regional Park District 700'700'700' LEGEND Segment 1 = Existing Resurface trail with asphalt and minor maintenance Segment 2 = Proposed Construct asphalt trail and related improvements Segment 3 = Existing Upgrade existing crossing to meet current standards Existing Trails No work proposed, previously constructed by City Carquinez Scenic DrCarquinez Scenic Dr Foster StFoster StFoster StFoster St Embarcad e r o S t Embarcad e r o S t Berrellesa StBerrellesa StBuckley StBuckley StMarina Vista AveMarina Vista Ave Carquinez Scenic Dr Foster StFoster St Embarcad e r o S t Berrellesa StBuckley StMarina Vista Ave Great California Delta Trail Master Plan January 20, 2022 Prepared by TrailPeople for: Delta Protection Commission Great California Delta Trail Master Plan Chapter 2: Existing Conditions, Opportunities & Constraints Page 2.38 Figure 2-10: Map of Major Planned and Existing Regional Trails in and Around the Delta. January 20, 2022 Great California Delta Trail Master Plan Chapter 3: Master Plan Recommendations Page 3.10 3D. Western Region The Western Region is the gateway between the Delta and the Bay Area, where the San Francisco Bay Trail, Bay Area Ridge Trail, Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail, and SF Bay Area Water Trail overlap with the Delta Trail along the Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail. This Western Region includes the Carquinez Strait 1 and Suisun Marsh, both of which are included in the National Heritage Area (NHA) but are outside of the legal Delta (shown on Figure 2-1, in Chapter 2). At the boundary with the Southern Region, the Western Region includes Contra Costa County north of Highway 4. Counties: Contra Costa and Solano Legacy Communities: Bethel Island and Knightsen Western Region Communities: Antioch, Bay Point, Benicia, Bethel Island, Brentwood, Crockett, Discovery Bay, Knightsen Martinez, Pittsburg, Port Costa, Oakley, Suisan City, Vallejo Existing Delta Trail Segments (miles/operating agency): •Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail (24.3/EBRPD, Caltrans, City of Vallejo, City of Benicia, California State Parks) •Big Break Regional Shoreline (3.1/EBRPD) •Marsh Creek Regional Trail (4.2/EBRPD) Total Existing Trail: 31.6 miles Planned/Proposed Delta Trail Segments (miles/planning agency): •Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail (1.2/City of Vallejo) •Delta Access Trail (7.4/EBRPD) •Great California Delta Trail/Contra Costa Shoreline Route (23.1/EBRPD) Total Planned or Proposed Trail: 31.7 miles 1 The Carquinez Strait is an eight-mile-long narrow tidal strait that connects Suisun Bay and the tidal estuary of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers on the east with the San Pablo Bay, the northern extension of the San Francisco Bay, on the west. January 20, 2022 Great California Delta Trail Master Plan Chapter 3: Master Plan Recommendations Page 3.11 Western Region Trail Recommendations 1.Support trail planning efforts along the Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail. In 2017, the Commission designated the Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail (CSSLT) as a Delta Trail segment (Resolution 17-01). The CSSLT is currently a popular bike loop (approximately 24 miles, including gaps and incomplete segments) across both the Carquinez and Benicia-Martinez Bridges and through four historic downtowns (Benicia, Martinez, Port Costa, and Crockett). The trail is accessible by Amtrak in Martinez and passes by numerous restaurants, parks, and open spaces. It provides excellent birdwatching opportunities of migrating waterfowl. The long-term vision is for a continuous hiking, biking, and equestrian trail that hugs the shoreline (the inner loop) and an outer loop along the ridgelines in Contra Costa County that provide opportunities to explore the shoreline and ridgelines overlooking the Strait in Contra Costa and Solano Counties. This loop is the eastern limits of the San Francisco Bay Trail and Bay Area Ridge Trail and is a starting point for the Delta Trail. Recommendation: Continue to support CSSLT planning efforts. As new segments are completed and gaps are closed, those segments should be signed with the Delta Trail logo and added to Delta Trail maps. 2.Support EBRPD Delta Trail Alignments in Contra Costa County. The East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) has established a planned Delta Trail alignment along the shoreline of Contra Costa County connecting Martinez to Big Break in Oakley. This alignment is shown in their 2013 Master Plan and is included in the Commission’s Resolution 17-01. EBRPD is actively working with Contra Costa County and the Cities of Pittsburg, Antioch, and Oakley to design and build segments of this alignment. Additionally, EBRPD has numerous Delta access trails planned throughout eastern Contra Costa County. These include a loop trail around Jersey Island, a planned route to Discovery Bay, among others shown on the map. Recommendation: The Commission should continue to support EBRPD’s work on this alignment. As new segments are completed and gaps are closed, those segments should be added to Delta Trail maps and Delta Trail logos should be added to trail signs. Photo of a hiker on the Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail in the Carquinez Regional Shoreline January 20, 2022 Figure 3-4: Western Delta Region Map FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FOR GREAT CALIFORNIA DELTA TRAIL GAP CLOSURE PLANNING PHASE AT CARQUINEZ REGIONAL SHORELINE IN MARTINEZ, CA This Funding Agreement, hereinafter referred to as “AGREEMENT”, is made and entered into on the ___ day of January, 2024 (“EFFECTIVE DATE”), by and between the East Bay Regional Park District, hereinafter referred to as "EBRPD," and Contra Costa County, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY”. EBRPD and COUNTY are sometimes referred to herein together as the “Parties” and each as a “Party.” RECITALS WHEREAS, the U.S. Navy compensated the COUNTY an undisclosed fee amount in the early 1990s to help the COUNTY mitigate the closure of the Port Chicago Highway through the Concord Naval Weapons Station. When the COUNTY closed that road at the Navy’s request, an east-west arterial that linked Bay Point, Clyde and Concord, and provided access to the waterfront was lost. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors adopted in 1991, and updated in 2008 and 2010, the Navy Mitigation Expenditure Plan, which includes a road and trail project list and allocates funds to specified road and trail projects on that list. WHEREAS, the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure project, hereinafter referred to as “PROJECT,” will construct a shared-use trail along an agreed upon easement in Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way between the Nejedly Staging Area and Berrellesa Street in the City of Martinez. The PROJECT is included on the Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan project list (Project #7). A PROJECT map is attached as Exhibit “A”. WHEREAS, COUNTY is willing to provide a portion of the PROJECT funding to completed final design and environmental permitting, and EBRPD will accept that funding, under the terms of this AGREEMENT. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties mutually agree as follows: Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 2 of 7 SECTION I COUNTY AGREES: (1) That its Public Works Director, or designee, will process a reimbursement to EBRPD for actual expenses that EBRPD incurs related to the PROJECT up to, but not to exceed, $201,580, within 30 days of receipt of a cost summary and an invoice from the EBRPD, provided that the Public Works Director, or designee, determines that EBRPD’s reimbursement request is consistent with the PROJECT budget attached as Exhibit “B”. SECTION II EBRPD AGREES: (1) To implement the PROJECT, including but not limited to consultant selection, the development of consultant services agreement, administration of the contract, final review of the work product, and disseminating work products as required. (2) To provide draft project plans to COUNTY for review and comments. (3) To coordinate comments on the plans as appropriate. SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (1) The term of this AGREEMENT begins on the EFFECTIVE DATE, and it expires upon the satisfaction of the Parties’ obligations under Section I and Section II, above. (2) EBRPD shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless COUNTY, its Board of Supervisors, officers, agents, employees, contractors, successors, and assigns (collectively, the “COUNTY INDEMNITEES”) from and against any and all losses, damages, liabilities, claims, suits, costs, and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, (collectively, “LIABILITIES”) arising out of or connected with (a) EBRPD’s obligations under this AGREEMENT, (b) EBRPD’s use of funds provided by the COUNTY under this AGREEMENT, or (c) the design, construction, implementation, maintenance, removal, replacement, modification, repair, or operation of the PROJECT. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, EBRPD shall not be required to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the COUNTY INDEMNITEES from any LIABILITIES that arise from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the COUNTY INDEMNITEES or any of them. The requirements of this Section III(2) shall survive the expiration or termination of this AGREEMENT. (3) Notices regarding this AGREEMENT shall be given (a) by personal delivery, (b) by First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, or (c) by overnight carrier for next business day delivery, and addressed to: To EBRPD: Grants Department, Finance and Management Services Division Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 3 of 7 Attn. Grants Manager P. O. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605-0381 To COUNTY: Public Works Department, Transportation Engineering Attn. Assistant Public Works Director 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553. A notice shall be deemed given on the day it is personally delivered, on the fifth day after mailing, or on the next business day following the date it is deposited with an overnight carrier for next business-day delivery. (4) This AGREEMENT contains the entire agreement between the Parties with regard to matters described in this AGREEMENT and supersedes all prior agreements, whether written or oral, between the Parties with respect to such subject matter. (5) This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and enforced under the laws of the State of California. (6) If any provision of this AGREEMENT shall be held to be invalid, illegal, unenforceable, or in conflict with the law of any jurisdiction, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. (7) This AGREEMENT may not be modified or amended except in a writing signed by both Parties hereto. (8) The section headings and captions of this AGREEMENT are, and the arrangement of this AGREEMENT is, for the sole convenience of the Parties to this AGREEMENT. The section headings, captions, and arrangement of this AGREEMENT do not in any way affect, limit, amplify, or modify the terms and provisions of this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall not be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the Parties, but rather as if all Parties have prepared it. The Parties to this AGREEMENT and their attorneys have read and reviewed this AGREEMENT and agree that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply to the interpretation of this AGREEMENT. The recitals of this AGREEMENT are, and shall be enforceable as, a part of this AGREEMENT. (9) Unless expressly stated herein, nothing in this AGREEMENT is intended to confer on any person, other than the Parties and their successors and assigns, any rights or remedies by reason of this AGREEMENT. (10) A waiver of breach of any covenant or provision in this AGREEMENT shall not be deemed a waiver of any other covenant or provision in this AGREEMENT, and no waiver shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the waiving party. (11) The sole remedy for violation of this AGREEMENT shall be the specific Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 4 of 7 performance of this AGREEMENT. (12) This AGREEMENT may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. (13) In any action or proceeding to enforce or interpret any provision of this AGREEMENT, or where any provision hereof is validly asserted as a defense, each Party shall bear its own attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses. Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 5 of 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed by their respective officers, duly authorized as of the day, month, and year first hereinabove written. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT By______________________________ By______________________________ (Signature of Authorized Representative) (Signature of Authorized Representative) Title:____________________________ Sabrina B. Landreth (Print Name of Authorized Representative) Title: General Manager Approved as to Form: Thomas L. Geiger, County Counsel Approved as to Form: By_______________________________ By________________________________ Deputy County Counsel East Bay Regional Park District District Counsel Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 6 of 7 Exhibit A PROJECT MAP Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 7 of 7 Exhibit B PROJECT BUDGET FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FOR GREAT CALIFORNIA DELTA TRAIL GAP CLOSURE PLANNING PHASE AT CARQUINEZ REGIONAL SHORELINE IN MARTINEZ, CA This Funding Agreement, hereinafter referred to as “AGREEMENT”, is made and entered into on the ___ day of January, 2024 (“EFFECTIVE DATE”), by and between the East Bay Regional Park District, hereinafter referred to as "EBRPD," and Contra Costa County, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY”. EBRPD and COUNTY are sometimes referred to herein together as the “Parties” and each as a “Party.” RECITALS WHEREAS, the U.S. Navy compensated the COUNTY an undisclosed fee amount in the early 1990s to help the COUNTY mitigate the closure of the Port Chicago Highway through the Concord Naval Weapons Station. When the COUNTY closed that road at the Navy’s request, an east-west arterial that linked Bay Point, Clyde and Concord, and provided access to the waterfront was lost. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors adopted in 1991, and updated in 2008 and 2010, the Navy Mitigation Expenditure Plan, which includes a road and trail project list and allocates funds to specified road and trail projects on that list. WHEREAS, the Great California Delta Trail Gap Closure project, hereinafter referred to as “PROJECT,” will construct a shared-use trail along an agreed upon easement in Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way between the Nejedly Staging Area and Berrellesa Street in the City of Martinez. The PROJECT is included on the Navy Mitigation Fund Expenditure Plan project list (Project #7). A PROJECT map is attached as Exhibit “A”. WHEREAS, COUNTY is willing to provide a portion of the PROJECT funding to completed final design and environmental permitting, and EBRPD will accept that funding, under the terms of this AGREEMENT. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties mutually agree as follows: Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 2 of 7 SECTION I COUNTY AGREES: (1) That its Public Works Director, or designee, will process a reimbursement to EBRPD for actual expenses that EBRPD incurs related to the PROJECT up to, but not to exceed, $201,580, within 30 days of receipt of a cost summary and an invoice from the EBRPD, provided that the Public Works Director, or designee, determines that EBRPD’s reimbursement request is consistent with the PROJECT budget attached as Exhibit “B”. SECTION II EBRPD AGREES: (1) To implement the PROJECT, including but not limited to consultant selection, the development of consultant services agreement, administration of the contract, final review of the work product, and disseminating work products as required. (2) To provide draft project plans to COUNTY for review and comments. (3) To coordinate comments on the plans as appropriate. SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (1) The term of this AGREEMENT begins on the EFFECTIVE DATE, and it expires upon the satisfaction of the Parties’ obligations under Section I and Section II, above. (2) EBRPD shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless COUNTY, its Board of Supervisors, officers, agents, employees, contractors, successors, and assigns (collectively, the “COUNTY INDEMNITEES”) from and against any and all losses, damages, liabilities, claims, suits, costs, and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, (collectively, “LIABILITIES”) arising out of or connected with (a) EBRPD’s obligations under this AGREEMENT, (b) EBRPD’s use of funds provided by the COUNTY under this AGREEMENT, or (c) the design, construction, implementation, maintenance, removal, replacement, modification, repair, or operation of the PROJECT. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, EBRPD shall not be required to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the COUNTY INDEMNITEES from any LIABILITIES that arise from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the COUNTY INDEMNITEES or any of them. The requirements of this Section III(2) shall survive the expiration or termination of this AGREEMENT. (3) Notices regarding this AGREEMENT shall be given (a) by personal delivery, (b) by First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, or (c) by overnight carrier for next business day delivery, and addressed to: To EBRPD: Grants Department, Finance and Management Services Division Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 3 of 7 Attn. Grants Manager P. O. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605-0381 To COUNTY: Public Works Department, Transportation Engineering Attn. Assistant Public Works Director 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553. A notice shall be deemed given on the day it is personally delivered, on the fifth day after mailing, or on the next business day following the date it is deposited with an overnight carrier for next business-day delivery. (4) This AGREEMENT contains the entire agreement between the Parties with regard to matters described in this AGREEMENT and supersedes all prior agreements, whether written or oral, between the Parties with respect to such subject matter. (5) This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and enforced under the laws of the State of California. (6) If any provision of this AGREEMENT shall be held to be invalid, illegal, unenforceable, or in conflict with the law of any jurisdiction, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. (7) This AGREEMENT may not be modified or amended except in a writing signed by both Parties hereto. (8) The section headings and captions of this AGREEMENT are, and the arrangement of this AGREEMENT is, for the sole convenience of the Parties to this AGREEMENT. The section headings, captions, and arrangement of this AGREEMENT do not in any way affect, limit, amplify, or modify the terms and provisions of this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall not be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the Parties, but rather as if all Parties have prepared it. The Parties to this AGREEMENT and their attorneys have read and reviewed this AGREEMENT and agree that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply to the interpretation of this AGREEMENT. The recitals of this AGREEMENT are, and shall be enforceable as, a part of this AGREEMENT. (9) Unless expressly stated herein, nothing in this AGREEMENT is intended to confer on any person, other than the Parties and their successors and assigns, any rights or remedies by reason of this AGREEMENT. (10) A waiver of breach of any covenant or provision in this AGREEMENT shall not be deemed a waiver of any other covenant or provision in this AGREEMENT, and no waiver shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the waiving party. (11) The sole remedy for violation of this AGREEMENT shall be the specific Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 4 of 7 performance of this AGREEMENT. (12) This AGREEMENT may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. (13) In any action or proceeding to enforce or interpret any provision of this AGREEMENT, or where any provision hereof is validly asserted as a defense, each Party shall bear its own attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses. Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 5 of 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed by their respective officers, duly authorized as of the day, month, and year first hereinabove written. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT By______________________________ By______________________________ (Signature of Authorized Representative) (Signature of Authorized Representative) Title:____________________________ Sabrina B. Landreth (Print Name of Authorized Representative) Title: General Manager Approved as to Form: Thomas L. Geiger, County Counsel Approved as to Form: By_______________________________ By________________________________ Deputy County Counsel East Bay Regional Park District District Counsel Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 6 of 7 Exhibit A PROJECT MAP Cooperative Funding Agreement Great CA Delta Trail Gap Closure – Planning Phase Funds 7 of 7 Exhibit B PROJECT BUDGET 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0506 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (RecycleMore) requiring RecycleMore to perform some of the County’s regulatory obligations pertaining to reduction of organic waste disposal within the portion of the unincorporated West County area served by Richmond Sanitary Service under the solid waste collection franchise agreement with the County. (No fiscal impact) Attachments:1. Memorandum of Understanding Between Contra Costa County and West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority Regarding Implementation of SB 1383 Regulations Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Memorandum of Understanding with West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director, or designee, to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (RecycleMore) requiring RecycleMore to perform some of the County’s regulatory obligations pertaining to reduction of organic waste disposal within the County/Richmond Sanitary Service (RSS) Franchise Area. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no impact to the General Fund. RecycleMore receives post-collection rate revenue from Republic Services to fund a portion of the RecycleMore’s operating expenses, which includes, but is not limited to, costs of regulatory compliance activities related to the passage of the Short-lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Act (SB 1383). BACKGROUND: In 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law the Short-lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Act (SB 1383). SB 1383 required CalRecycle to develop regulations to reduce organics in landfills as a source of methane. The regulations CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0506,Version:1 developed by CalRecycle under SB 1383 will be referred to as the “SB 1383 Regulations”. The SB 1383 Regulations require counties, cities, and other local jurisdictions to adopt enforceable ordinances or other enforceable mechanisms to mandate that organic waste generators, haulers, and other entities comply with various requirements aimed at reducing the disposal of organic waste. The SB 1383 Regulations applicable to jurisdictions relate to organic waste collection services, inspection of waste containers for prohibited contaminants, regulation of commercial edible food generators, provision of education and outreach information to generators, reporting to CalRecycle on compliance with the SB 1383 Regulations, and maintenance of records of compliance with SB 1383 Regulations. Under the SB 1383 Regulations, the County may designate a public or private entity to fulfill certain County responsibilities under the SB 1383 Regulations through an agreement such as a memorandum of understanding. The proposed MOU delegates to RecycleMore the County’s obligations related to organic waste collection service requirements, inspection of waste containers for prohibited contaminants, inspection of commercial edible food generators, provision of education and outreach information to generators, assistance with capacity planning and requires RecycleMore to provide information to County for reporting to CalRecycle on compliance with the SB 1383 Regulations and maintain records of compliance with SB 1383 Regulations. The RecycleMore Board of Directors approved this MOU and a similar MOU with the City of Pinole at its February 8, 2024, meeting. RecycleMore plans to enter into similar MOUs with the other member cities (Hercules, San Pablo, El Cerrito, and Richmond). The County does not compensate RecycleMore under this MOU because RecycleMore receives revenue from Republic Services (parent company to RSS) customers to pay for these activities. Rates charged to the Republic Services customers in the unincorporated County/RSS Franchise Area include a post-collection rate. The post-collection rate covers the cost of services associated with the management of waste after it is collected. RecycleMore sets a post-collection rate each year, which includes a regulatory compliance component. This portion of the post-collection rate generates revenues for RecycleMore’s SB 1383 compliance activities, including regulatory requirements pertaining to organic waste disposal. All costs to perform responsibilities delegated in this MOU are covered under the post-collection rates charged to customers located in the unincorporated West County area served by Republic Services under the County/RSS Franchise Area. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not approve the MOU, RecycleMore will not be obligated to provide needed SB 1383 regulatory compliance assistance in the County/RSS Franchise Area. The County would then be fully obligated to perform all the associated work instead. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0506,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Page 1 of 14 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND WEST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF SB 1383 REGULATIONS This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is made this ____ day of ___________, 2022 (the “Effective Date”), by and between Contra Costa County, a political subdivision of the State of California (“County”) and West Contra Costa County Integrated Waste Management Authority, a joint powers authority established under the laws of the State of California (“Authority”) (collectively the “Parties” and individually a “Party”). RECITALS A. On April 2, 1991, the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo (“Cities”), and the West Contra Costa Sanitary District (“District”) formed Authority to establish integrated resource recovery facilities for the benefit of its members. B. On June 11, 1991, County adopted County Ordinance No. 91-31, requiring solid waste handling businesses to obtain franchises from the County in order to lawfully operate in the unincorporated area, and requiring public agencies that provided solid waste handling services to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the County. After the adoption of County Ordinance No. 91-31, District withdrew as a member of Authority and ceased providing solid waste handling services in the unincorporated area. C. On May 25, 1993, County and Authority entered into a contract (“Contract”), under which County (1) agreed to direct all solid waste collected within the unincorporated area of District’s jurisdiction to solid waste processing facilities designated by Authority, (2) delegated to Authority the authority to regulate rates charged at the Integrated Resource Recovery Facility, and (3) agreed to include specified provisions in solid waste collection franchise agreements mandating collectors to collect those rates from customers (“Rate Provisions”). D. On October 12, 1993, County approved a solid waste collection franchise agreement with Richmond Sanitary Service, Inc. (“RSS”), (“Franchise Agreement”) to collect solid waste in the unincorporated west County area (the “RSS Franchise Area”), the boundaries of which are depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein. Pursuant to the Contract, the Franchise Agreement incorporated the Rate Provisions contained in the Contract. Page 2 of 14 E. On October 10, 2013, Authority entered into an agreement with West County Resource Recovery, Inc., West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill, Inc., Golden Bear Transfer Services, Inc., and Keller Canyon Landfill Company and RSS (collectively “Republic Services Entities”) for post- collection recycling and disposal services (“Post-Collection Agreement”). Among other things, the Post-Collection Agreement established a “Post- Collection Rate” to be collected by Republic Services Entities from customers. Revenue from the Post-Collection Rate is used to compensate Republic Services Entities and fund a portion of Authority’s operating expenses, which include costs of regulatory compliance activities that Authority conducts on behalf of its members and County. F. The Post-Collection Agreement provided that prior to it taking effect, Cities and County (collectively the “Franchise Agencies”) were required to amend their respective solid waste collection franchise agreements by including specified provisions. The Post-Collection Agreement further provided that Franchise Agencies approving these amendments by November 15, 2013, would be “able to receive the benefits of the new post collection rates.” County approved the required amendment of its Franchise Agreement with RSS on November 12, 2013. G. For the past two calendar years, and in 2022, the Post-Collection Rate includes amounts specifically intended to generate revenue to cover Authority costs to address regulatory mandates, including mandates arising from the passage of the Short-lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Act (“SB 1383”). Among other things, SB 1383 included a requirement that the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (“CalRecycle”) develop regulations to reduce organics in landfills as a source of methane. The regulations developed by CalRecycle under SB 1383 revised numerous provisions of division 7 of title 14 of the California Code of Regulations and added Chapter 12, entitled “Short-lived Climate Pollutants,” effective January 1, 2022. Hereafter, Chapter 12 of division 7 of title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, with the exception of articles 8 and 9, will be referred to as the “SB 1383 Regulations.” H. The SB 1383 Regulations require counties, cities and other local jurisdictions to adopt enforceable ordinances or other enforceable mechanisms to implement programs requiring organic waste generators and waste haulers to meet minimum standards for organic waste collection services, inspect waste containers for prohibited contaminants, regulate commercial edible food generators, provide education and outreach information to generators, report to CalRecycle on compliance with the SB 1383 Regulations, and maintain records of compliance with SB 1383 Regulations, with the goal of achievement of statewide organic waste disposal reduction targets. In accordance with the SB 1383 Regulations, County adopted County Ordinance No. 2021-38 (“County’s Page 3 of 14 Ordinance”) on December 14, 2021. County’s Ordinance added Chapter 418-20 to the County Ordinance Code. I. Under the SB 1383 Regulations, a county may designate a joint powers authority to fulfill certain obligations in a memorandum of understanding. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 18981.2, subd. (b).) Because the Post- Collection Rate generates revenue for Authority to conduct SB 1383 compliance activities, and because the Post-Collection Rate is charged to and paid by customers of RSS under the Franchise Agreement, County and Authority have agreed that Authority should conduct certain SB 1383 compliance activities on behalf of County and use its revenue from the Post-Collection Rate to fund these activities. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the Parties hereby agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and hereby incorporated herein. 2. Term. This MOU shall commence on the Effective Date and remain in full force and effect until terminated as set forth in paragraph 7 of this MOU. 3. Definitions. a. “Complaint” means a complaint that (i) alleges a violation of County’s Ordinance or Title 14 within the RSS Franchise Area and (ii) conforms to all applicable requirements in section 18995.3 of Title 14. b. “County’s Representative” means the County representative identified in paragraph 8 of this MOU or his or her designee. c. “RSS Implementation Record” means all records pertaining to the RSS Franchise Area that must be maintained by County under section 18995.2 of Title 14. d. “Subscribers” means organic waste generators who reside or do business within the RSS Franchise Area and subscribe to the organic waste collection service provided by RSS in the RSS Franchise Area. e. “Title 14” means title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. Page 4 of 14 f. If a term appearing in this MOU is defined in the SB 1383 Regulations, the term will have the meaning set forth in the SB 1383 Regulations, except as otherwise set forth in this MOU. g. The following terms will have the meanings set forth in County’s Ordinance, as may be amended from time to time. As of the Effective Date, County’s Ordinance defines these terms as follows: (1) “Commercial business” means a firm, partnership, proprietorship, joint- stock company, corporation, or association, whether for-profit or nonprofit, that operates a business facility in the unincorporated area, including, by way of example and without limitation, strip malls, industrial facilities and multifamily residential dwellings consisting of five or more units. (2) “Commercial edible food generator” means an entity, other than a food recovery organization or food recovery service, that: (a) Disposes of edible food in the course of the entity’s operation of a commercial business; (b) Disposes of edible food in the course of the entity’s operation of a large venue or large event, either directly or indirectly through a food facility; or (c) Arranges for the recovery of edible food that would otherwise be disposed of in the course of the entity’s operation of a commercial business, large venue or large event. (3) “Edible food” means food that is intended for human consumption and meets the food safety requirements of the California Retail Food Code. (4) “Food distributor” means a commercial business that distributes food to entities including, but not limited to, supermarkets and grocery stores. (5) “Food facility” means a food facility as defined in section 113789 of the California Health and Safety Code. (6) “Food recovery” means the collection of food designated for disposal and the distribution of the collected food for human consumption. (7) “Food recovery organization” means an entity that collects or receives edible food from commercial edible food generators or food recovery services and, either directly or indirectly, distributes that edible food to the public for consumption. Food recovery organizations include, but are not limited to, all of the following: Page 5 of 14 (a) Food banks as defined in section 113783 of the California Health and Safety Code; (b) Nonprofit charitable organizations as defined in section 113841 of the California Health and Safety Code; and (c) Nonprofit charitable temporary food facilities as defined in section 113842 of the California Health and Safety Code. (8) “Food recovery service” means a person who collects and transports edible food from a commercial edible food generator to a food recovery organization or other entities for distribution to the public for consumption. (9) “Food service provider” means a person primarily engaged in providing contracted food services to institutional, governmental, commercial, or industrial customers. (10) “Grocery store” means a store located in the unincorporated area of the county that is primarily engaged in the retail sale of canned food, dry goods, fresh fruits and vegetables, fresh meats, fish and poultry; and any area that is not separately owned within the store where the food is prepared and served, including a bakery, deli, and meat and seafood departments. (11) “Large event” means an event in the unincorporated area of the county that is attended by an average of more than 2,000 individuals each day of the event and that (1) requires payment of an admission price; or (2) is operated by a local agency. (12) “Large venue” means a permanent venue facility in the unincorporated area of the county where an average of more than 2,000 individuals are seated or served each day of operation. By way of example and without limitation, venue facilities include stadiums, amphitheaters, arenas, halls, amusement parks, conference or civic centers, zoos, aquariums, airports, racetracks, horse tracks, performing arts centers, fairgrounds, museums, theaters, and other public attraction facilities. A site under common ownership or control that includes two or more contiguous large venues is a single large venue. (13) “Organic waste” means solid waste containing material originated from living organisms and their metabolic waste products including, but not limited to, food, green material, landscape and pruning waste, organic textiles and carpets, lumber, wood, paper products, printing and writing paper, manure, biosolids, digestate, and sludges. (14) “Organic waste collection service” means a service provided to customers by a hauler under a franchise agreement to collect routinely generated organic waste from properties in the unincorporated area. Page 6 of 14 (15) “Organic waste generator” means a person who: (a) Resides in, or operates a commercial business or other facility located in, the unincorporated area of the county; and (b) Creates organic waste. (16) “Person” means an individual, firm, limited liability company, association, partnership, political subdivision, government agency, municipality, industry, public or private corporation, or any other entity whatsoever. (17) “Supermarket” means a full-line, self-service retail store located in the unincorporated area of the county that has gross annual sales of $2 million or more and sells a line of dry grocery, canned goods, or nonfood items and some perishable items. (18) “Tier one commercial edible food generator” means a commercial edible food generator that operates a grocery store with a total facility size equal to or greater than 10,000 square feet, or operates a supermarket, or is a food distributor, wholesale food vendor, or food service provider that serves customers in the unincorporated area of the county. (19) “Tier two commercial edible food generator” means a commercial edible food generator that: (a) Operates a large venue or large event; or (b) Operates one of the following in the unincorporated area of the county: (i) A restaurant with 250 or more seats, or a total facility size equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet; (ii) A hotel that has an on-site food facility and 200 or more rooms; or (ii) A health facility that has an on-site food facility and 100 or more beds. (20) “Wholesale food vendor” means a commercial business where food is received, shipped, stored, and prepared for distribution to a retailer, warehouse, distributor, or other destination. Page 7 of 14 4. Authority Obligations a. Education and outreach (1) To organic waste generators. At least once each calendar year of this MOU, Authority shall provide to all Subscribers all of the information described in section 18985.1 of Title 14 in the form and manner described therein. Prior to disseminating any materials under this paragraph, Authority shall provide the materials to, and obtain approval of the materials from, County’s Representative. (2) To commercial edible food generators. At least once each calendar year of this MOU, Authority shall provide to all tier one commercial edible food generators and tier two commercial edible food generators located in the RSS Franchise Area all of the information described in section 18985.2 of Title 14 in the form and manner described therein. Prior to disseminating any materials under this paragraph, Authority shall provide the materials to, and obtain approval of the materials from, County’s Representative. b. Reporting and recordkeeping (1) Capacity information (a) Organic waste recycling. Authority shall timely provide County with information regarding organic waste recycling capacity within the RSS Franchise Area in response to a request by County under section 18992.1 of Title 14. (b) Edible food recovery. Authority shall timely provide County with information regarding edible food recovery capacity within the RSS Franchise Area in response to a request by County under section 18992.2 of Title 14. (2) Implementation Record (a) Records maintenance. To the extent that the Authority creates or obtains a record that must be maintained in the RSS Implementation Record, within 30 days of the creation of the record, Authority will store the record in the RSS Implementation Record. All records stored in the RSS Implementation Record will remain in the RSS Implementation Record until County directs otherwise. Authority shall provide CalRecycle with access to the RSS Implementation Record upon request within 10 business days. Authority shall provide County with electronic access to all Authority records related to Authority’s responsibilities under this MOU through a cloud- based software program when, and for so long as, County provides the program at County’s sole cost. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this paragraph requires Authority to disclose documents not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.) Page 8 of 14 (b) Records requests. Authority will respond to a request for records contained in the RSS Implementation Record in accordance with all applicable requirements in the California Public Records Act. (3) Compliance and annual reports. Authority shall prepare and submit to County all of the RSS Franchise Area-related information that County is required to include in its initial compliance report under section 18994.1 of Title 14, and annual reports under section 18994.2 of Title 14, at least 45 days prior to the applicable reporting deadlines set forth in these sections. c. Assistance with capacity planning (1) Organic waste processing capacity. Authority shall assist County with its organic waste processing capacity planning obligations under section 18992.1 of Title 14 to the extent that the planning pertains to organic waste recycling capacity within the RSS Franchise Area, in the manner requested by County’s Representative. At a minimum, Authority will: (a) Estimate existing, expanded and new organic waste processing capacity within the RSS Franchise Area, and provide the estimates to County’s Representative within 120 days after receipt of a request by County’s Representative for the information; and (b) If County determines that additional organic waste processing capacity is needed within the RSS Franchise Area, within 120 days of receipt of notice by County’s Representative, Authority will prepare and submit to County’s Representative an implementation schedule for the RSS Franchise Area that conforms to the requirements in section 18992.1, subdivision (d)(1), of Title 14. (2) Edible food recovery capacity. Authority shall assist County with its edible food recovery capacity planning obligations under section 18992.2 of Title 14 to the extent that the planning pertains to edible food recovery capacity within the RSS Franchise Area, in the manner requested by County. At a minimum, Authority will: (a) Estimate existing, expanded and edible food recovery capacity within the RSS Franchise Area, and provide the estimates to County’s Representative within 120 days after receipt of a request by County’s Representative for the information; and (b) If County determines that additional edible food recovery capacity is needed within the RSS Franchise Area, within 120 days of receipt of notice by County’s Representative, Authority will prepare and submit to County’s Representative an implementation schedule for the RSS Franchise Area that conforms to the requirements in section 18992.2, subdivision (c)(1), of Title 14. d. Edible food recovery program. Authority shall develop and implement an edible food recovery program within the RSS Franchise Area that conforms to the Page 9 of 14 requirements in section 18991.1 of Title 14. The Parties agree that these requirements may be wholly or partially satisfied under other agreements between Authority and County or agreements between Authority and third parties. In addition to Authority actions under subparagraphs 4.a.(2) and 4.e. of this MOU that pertain to edible food generators or edible food recovery entities within the RSS Franchise Area, the program will include actions by Authority to: (1) Increase access to food recovery organizations and food recovery services by tier one commercial edible food generators and tier two commercial edible food generators located in the RSS Franchise Area; and (2) Increase edible food recovery capacity if County determines that the RSS Franchise Area does not have sufficient capacity to meet its edible food recovery needs. e. Enforcement. Authority shall assist County with enforcement of County’s Ordinance as follows: (1) Complaints; investigations (a) Authority shall develop written procedures for the receipt and investigation of Complaints. The written procedures must conform to all applicable requirements set forth in section 18995.3 of Title 14. Authority shall provide the procedures to County’s Representative within 30 days after the Effective Date and obtain County’s Representative’s approval of the procedures before Authority receives or investigates any Complaints. (b) Authority shall investigate Complaints that it receives in accordance with the requirements set forth in section 18995.3 of Title 14 and procedures approved under subparagraph 4.e.(1)(a) of this MOU. If Authority determines based upon its investigation of a Complaint that a provision of County’s Ordinance has been violated, Authority shall prepare and submit to County’s Representative and the alleged violator a report that (i) identifies the alleged violator and provision(s) determined to have been violated, (ii) summarizes the facts regarding the violation; (iii) includes photographs and other documentary evidence of the violation; (iv) describes Authority’s efforts to educate the alleged violator and assist the violator in achieving compliance with County’s Ordinance in accordance with subparagraph 4.e.(1)(c) of this MOU; and (v) describes any and all past violations of County’s Ordinance by the violator. (c) Authority shall develop and provide to County’s Representative for its review and approval standardized procedures for educating and seeking voluntary compliance from persons determined to have violated a provision of County’s Ordinance, in accordance with section 18995.1, subdivision (a)(4) of Title 14. When Authority receives a Complaint or otherwise determines that a person has violated a provision of County’s Ordinance, Authority shall follow the approved procedures. Page 10 of 14 (d) Upon receipt of a written request from County’s Representative for assistance with investigation of a potential violation of County’s Ordinance or the SB 1383 Regulations within the RSS Franchise Area, Authority will utilize its best efforts to provide the requested assistance. Such assistance may include, without limitation, gathering facts from Authority’s contractors and other witnesses regarding the identity of the potential violator and the date, time, location and nature of the potential violation, and providing written reports to County’s Representative regarding Authority’s investigative findings. (2) Inspections and reviews (a) Authority shall conduct inspections of entities located in the RSS Franchise Area as needed to comply with section 18995.1, subdivisions (a)(2) and (b), of Title 14. All inspections must be conducted in accordance with the restrictions set forth in section 418-20.220 of County’s Ordinance as may be amended from time to time to conform to the SB 1383 Regulations. (b) Authority shall conduct compliance reviews of solid waste collection accounts of commercial businesses within the RSS Franchise Area as needed, and keep records of each review, in accordance with applicable provisions of section 18995.1, subdivision (a)(1)(A), of Title 14. (c) Authority shall conduct, or cause to be conducted, route reviews of organic waste generators within the RSS Franchise Area as needed for compliance with applicable organic waste generator requirements set forth in County Ordinance Code sections 418-20.206 and 418-20.208, in accordance with applicable provisions of sections 18995.1 and 18984.5 of Title 14. (d) Authority shall generate a written or electronic record of each inspection, route review, and compliance review that Authority conducts in the RSS Franchise Area under this paragraph. Each record will include all of the information required under section 18995.1, subdivision (c), of Title 14. (3) Formal enforcement support. In the event County initiates a formal enforcement action against an alleged violator under County Ordinance Code section 418-20.222, to the extent the violation occurred within the RSS Franchise Area, Authority will provide support to County in carrying out the enforcement action, in a manner directed by County’s Representative, including but not limited to working with RSS to determine whether the alleged violator has come into compliance prior to a compliance deadline in a notice of violation, and providing testimonial and other evidence at hearings. Page 11 of 14 f. Waivers (1) Authority shall assist County in processing applications by organic waste generators in the RSS Franchise Area for waivers under County Ordinance Code section 418-20.210, as follows: (a) Upon receipt of a copy of an application submitted to County and request by County’s Representative for assistance under this provision, Authority will promptly gather sufficient evidence to determine if a waiver is legally authorized under one or more of the grounds described in County Ordinance Code sections 418- 20.210(a) or (b), and make a preliminary determination whether a waiver should be granted or denied. (b) Within 14 days after receipt of County’s Representative’s request for assistance, Authority will provide a written report to County’s Representative that sets forth the evidence gathered and preliminary determination made under subparagraph 4.f.(1)(a) above. (2) Authority shall conduct inspections of each commercial business within the RSS Franchise Area that has a waiver under County Ordinance Code section 418- 20.210, in accordance with section 18995.1, subdivision (a)(6), of Title 14. (3) Upon request by County’s Representative, Authority shall assist County in investigating whether grounds exist to rescind a waiver granted to a person under County Ordinance Code section 418-20.210(f), by (a) gathering sufficient evidence to determine if the person no longer qualifies for the waiver, and making a preliminary determination whether the waiver should be rescinded; and (b) within 14 days of receipt of the request, providing a written report to County’s Representative that sets forth the evidence gathered and preliminary determination. (4) Authority shall provide a link on Authority’s website to County’s waiver application form. g. Other measures. Authority and County acknowledge that CalRecycle may, from time to time, issue opinions, directives or other communications regarding the obligations of jurisdictions under Title 14, and that responsibilities described in this paragraph may need to change, or new responsibilities added, in response to such communications. In the event of such a communication by CalRecycle, upon written notice by County to Authority, Authority will work cooperatively with County to develop and then promptly implement such measures that are needed to satisfy CalRecycle. h. Funding. Authority shall use revenues from the Post-Collection Rate charged to Subscribers, or other revenues available to Authority, to pay all staff and other costs incurred by Authority in performance of its responsibilities under this MOU. Page 12 of 14 5. Responsibilities of County a. Compliance with SB 1383 Regulations. Except for those responsibilities and requirements expressly assumed by Authority under this MOU, County shall be responsible for compliance with applicable provisions of the SB 1383 Regulations. b. Sharing of information. Within thirty (30) days of request by Authority, or promptly after information described in this paragraph becomes available to County, whichever is later, County shall share with Authority all data, documents, contact information for generators within the RSS Franchise Area, or any other information County deems necessary for Authority to carry out its responsibilities set forth in this MOU. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this subparagraph requires County to share documents not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. c. Enforcement. County shall be responsible for any formal enforcement of County’s Ordinance within the RSS Franchise Area. 6. Indemnification. Each Party, on behalf of itself and its boards, officers, employees, agents and consultants (individually and collectively the “Indemnitor”) shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the other Party and its boards, officers, employees, agents and consultants from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, losses, damages, liabilities, penalties, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, to the extent such claims, demands, actions, losses, damages, liabilities, penalties, costs and expenses are caused by or result from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the Indemnitor under this MOU. 7. Termination. This MOU may be terminated by mutual written consent of the Parties. Any Party may terminate this MOU, for any reason or no reason, upon giving three hundred and sixty-five (365) days’ prior written notice to the other Party. If County gives Authority 60 days written notice of termination, County may terminate this MOU upon giving Authority 60 days written notice of termination of the MOU. Upon termination of this MOU, Authority shall have no further obligations to carry out the Authority Responsibilities described in paragraph 4 of this MOU. The obligations set forth in paragraph 6 of this MOU will survive the termination of this MOU. 8. Notice. All notices under this MOU (including requests, reports, approvals, and other communications), shall be made in writing and either served personally, sent by first class mail, or sent by e-mail provided confirmation of delivery is obtained at the time of e-mail transmission, addressed as follows: To Authority: West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority 3220 Blume Drive, Suite 198 Richmond, CA 94806 Attn: Executive Director E-mail: PeterH@Recyclemore.com Page 13 of 14 To County: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Solid Waste Program Manager E-mail: Recycling@dcd.cccounty.us Any Party may change the address to which notice is to be given by providing the other Party with written notice of the change at least fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the effective date of the change. Service of notices shall be deemed complete on the date of receipt if personally served, or if served by e-mail provided confirmation of delivery is obtained at the time of email transmission. Service of notices sent by first class mail shall be deemed complete on the fifth (5th) day following deposit in the United States mail. 9. No Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this MOU will be binding unless executed in writing by the Party making the waiver. No waiver of any provision in this MOU will be deemed, or constitute, a waiver of any other provision, whether or not similar, nor will any waiver constitute a continuing waiver. 10. Counterparts. This MOU may be executed in counterparts and so executed shall constitute an agreement which shall be binding upon the Parties hereto. A photocopy of the fully executed MOU shall have the same force and effect as the original. 11. Governing Law and Venue. This MOU shall be deemed to be executed within the State of California and construed in accordance with and governed by laws of the State of California. Venue in any proceeding or action among the Parties arising out of this MOU shall be in Contra Costa County, California. 12. Amendment. This MOU may only be amended in writing signed by all Parties. This MOU may be amended to both extend the term and conditions, as well as to add tasks. Authority shall not begin new tasks without express written permission of County. 13. Entire Agreement. This MOU constitutes the entire agreement between County and Authority regarding the subject matter of this MOU, and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements regarding the subject matter of this MOU, whether written or oral. Page 14 of 14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this MOU on the day and year first above written. COUNTY By: _________________________ John Kopchik Conservation & Development Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mary Ann McNett Mason County Counsel By: _______________________ Deputy County Counsel AUTHORITY By: ____________________________ Peter Holtzclaw Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: _______________________ General Counsel ATTACHMENT: Exhibit A (Map) M:\Deidra\SB 1383\JPA MOUs\RecycleMore\RecyclemoreSB1383MOU_10-24-22.docx El Sobrante Rodeo Crockett Pleasant Hill Richmond Pinole Hercules Orinda El Cerrito San Pablo Lafayette Martinez §¨¦80 §¨¦580 §¨¦80 ÄÅ4 Alha m b r a V a l l e y R d Richmond Pkwy Cutting Blvd S t a t e H w y 1 2 3 23rd St San Pablo Ave Sa n P a b l o D a m R d Hilltop Dr Ca r l s o n B l v d McEwen Rd 34th St 3rd St Rumrill Blvd A r l i n g t o n B l v d Ohio Ave C u m m i n g s S k w y Giant Rd Pi n o l e V a l l e y R d El Portal Dr V a l l e y V i ew R d W i l l o w A v e Red w o o d R d Blume Dr Harbour Way 2nd St McBryde Ave Parker Ave A s h b u r y A v e Castro Ranch Rd Barrett Ave Fitzgerald Dr Solano Av e Appian Way Manor Rd Co lusa Ave Bayberry A v e A r l ing ton B l vd Castro StMap created 4/16/2012by Contra Costa County Department Conservation and Development Community Development Division--GIS Group30 Muir Rd, Martinez, CA 94553-0095This map contains copyrighted information and may not be altered. It may be reproduced in its current state if the source is cited. Users of this map agree to read and accept the County of Contra Costa disclaimer of liability for geographic information.I 0 2 41Miles Richmond Sanitary ServiceFranchise Area Map Alameda County Solano County Communities Served by RSSUnder Franchises with otherAgencies RSS/County Franchise ~ Kensington Exhibit A 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0507 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay an amount not to exceed $60,000 to Republic Services for debris clean-up boxes to assist with Community Clean-up events throughout unincorporated Contra Costa County for period February 13, 2024 to June 30, 2025, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (100% Clean California Grant funding) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Payment for Services Provided by Republic Services, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay an amount not to exceed $60,000 to Republic Services, Inc., for Clean-up Debris Boxes during the period of February 13, 2024, to June 30, 2025, to assist with Community Clean-up events throughout unincorporated Contra Costa County. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. (100% Clean California Grant Funding) BACKGROUND: On June 11, 2019, the County Board of Supervisors (Board) received a presentation from the interdepartmental Illegal Dumping Think Tank team and approved a total of fifty-six (56) illegal dumping strategies recommended by the interdepartmental Illegal Dumping Think Tank (one strategy has since been removed). The Board referred implementation of the recommendations to the Illegal Dumping Ad Hoc Committee. Strategy # 17 is to implement additional community clean-up events. To implement this strategy, the County needs to identify where additional clean- ups may be needed/warranted and seek to arrange clean-up box service through the applicable County franchise hauler or seek assistance through the applicable agency where the County does not control the collection franchise. The Clean California Local Grant Program (CCLGP) is a competitive statewide program created to beautify and clean up local streets and roads, tribal lands, parks, pathways, transit centers and other public spaces. Assembly Bill 149 (Section 16) created the CCLGP in 2021, and was codified under the Streets and Highway Code §91.41 et al. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0507,Version:1 The County was awarded CCLGP funding in 2022 to implement the following non-infrastructure tasks throughout the unincorporated area of the County: abatement of graffiti and abandoned / derelict recreational vehicles and boats, surveillance cameras, free disposal event(s) for disadvantaged communities, signage regarding proper waste collection, prevention and reporting of illegal dumping and grant administration/staff time. CCLGP funding also included funding for an infrastructure task at Montalvin Park. A portion of the funding awarded to the County is intended to be used to help implement Strategy #17. In order to utilize CCLGP funds to implement Strategy # 17, and fund additional community cleanup events, Board approval is required to authorize the Auditor to pay Republic Services for Clean-up Debris Boxes. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If authorization is not approved, the County is unable to procure additional clean-up boxes to allow for collection and disposal of solid waste in various communities of the unincorporated County. This would also negatively impact our ability to implement a portion of the Clean California Grant project. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0508 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller to issue payment of $45,000 to the U.S. Geological Survey to support their research on golden eagle nest locations in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (100% Contra Costa Avian Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Funding for County-wide Golden Eagle Nest Surveys ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller to issue a payment to the U.S. Geological Survey to support their research on golden eagle nest locations in Contra Costa County for $45,000, as recommended by the Director of the Department of Conservation and Development (100% Contra Costa Avian Fund). FISCAL IMPACT: 100% of recommended funding will come from unallocated Contra Costa Avian Fund monies and therefore will have no impact on the County’s General Fund. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa Avian Fund: The Contra Costa Avian Fund (Fund) was established as a condition of approval to the permitting of the Buena Vista Windfarm in east Contra Costa County. The windfarm operator was required to set up and contribute to an avian conservation fund to be used by the County for conservation efforts to benefit the bird species potentially impacted by the project. These funds are held and managed by the Department of Conservation and Development. The Contra Costa Avian Fund receives annual contributions from the windfarm operator of $500 per megawatt of nameplate capacity of each turbine, up to a maximum of $20,750 per year. There is currently $175,564.33 in the Fund. $45,900 is currently committed but not expended, leaving $129,644.33 available. This project would CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0508,Version:1 expend an additional $45,000 from the Fund. Project:The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is undertaking a regional (multi-county) effort to identify golden eagle nest sites to inform future conservation efforts of the species. Funding provided through the Contra Costa Avian Fund would support work in Contra Costa County. Golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) are under increasing threat and present a management concern in California and western North America. The species is considered fully protected in California by state (California Department of Fish and Wildlife codes) and federal regulations (i.e., the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act). Golden eagles are listed as target conservation species of the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan and are a key indicator species identified for continued monitoring under the East Bay Stewardship Network’s Ecological Health Assessment that includes all of Contra Costa County. Results of the study will enable land managers to identify areas with the greatest potential for site-occupancy and reproduction in relation to current and planned developments and change in climatic conditions. This information will be useful for setting priorities to promote the conservation of golden eagles within Contra Costa County. Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds it consistent with the purpose of the Contra Costa Avian Fund because it is a research effort that will generate information that can be used in Contra Costa County to inform decisions that may impact the golden eagle population. Staff recommends approving expenditure of $45,000 from the Contra Costa Avian Fund to support this study, and completing a project donation certification form to transmit funds to the U.S. Geological Survey for this work. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: This work will not be completed in Contra Costa County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0509 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 Title:DIRECT the County Building Official to suspend enforcement of the County’s all-electric building requirement that all newly constructed residential buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings be constructed as all-electric buildings, and related actions, as recommended by the Conservation and Development Director. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass 5:0 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development Report Title:Suspend Enforcement of All-Electric Building Requirement ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.DIRECT the County Building Official to suspend enforcement of the County’s all-electric building requirement (Section 74-4.010 of the County Ordinance Code). 2.DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) to inform the public of the various benefits of constructing all-electric buildings. 3.DIRECT the DCD Director, or designee, to amend the Draft Climate Action Plan to reflect the suspension of the County’s all-electric building requirement, and to evaluate alternative methods of meeting the County’s Climate Action Plan goals. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: Section 74-4.010 of the County Ordinance Code requires that any new residential building, detached accessory dwelling unit, hotel, office, or retail building constructed in the unincorporated area of the County be CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0509,Version:1 constructed as an all-electric building, i.e., a building without natural gas plumbing. The County is one of approximately 68 California local agencies that have adopted some form of an all-electric building requirement. On January 2, 2024, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated a City of Berkeley ordinance that prohibited natural gas infrastructure in new buildings. (California Rest. Ass'n v. City of Berkeley (9th Cir. 2024) 89 F.4th 1094.) The court held that the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (“EPCA”), a federal statute that regulates the energy efficiency of several consumer products including water heaters, furnaces, stoves, and HVAC systems, precludes cities and counties from adopting ordinances that prohibit the installation of gas plumbing in buildings. The County’s all-electric building requirement, like the invalidated City of Berkeley ordinance, prohibits the installation of gas plumbing in new buildings. Accordingly, the Director of the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) recommends that the Board suspend enforcement of the County’s all-electric building requirement while DCD staff evaluates alternative methods of meeting the County’s Climate Action Plan goals while also complying with the Ninth Circuit’s decision. If the enforcement of the County’s all-electric building requirements is suspended, building permit applicants may continue to voluntarily design and construct all-electric buildings. DCD staff will continue to inform the public about the benefits of all-electric construction, which include: the environmental and public health benefits of eliminating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with burning fossil fuels; foregoing the expense of installing gas pipes in new buildings; realizing any available financial incentives for installation of all-electric appliances; and preparing for the potential discontinuation of gas appliances in the future resulting from possible regulatory actions by regional, state or federal agencies. The County’s Draft Climate Action Plan (Draft CAP), which currently is out for public review, assumes continued enforcement of the County’s all-electric building requirements. With the suspension of the all- electric building requirements, the Draft CAP will need to be modified. However, consistent with the Draft CAP, DCD will continue to operate energy efficiency programs and partner with other agencies to assist property owners in taking advantage of various financial incentives promoting energy efficient design and construction, including the installation of electric appliances, clean energy systems, and battery storage to facilitate the use of electricity as the primary energy source in new and existing buildings. DCD will also continue to evaluate additional alternative mechanisms to incentivize building construction that minimizes GHG emissions and otherwise helps meet the County’s climate goals. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board of Supervisors does not approve the recommended actions, DCD will continue to enforce all- electric building requirements that are not consistent with the decision of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0509,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0510 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RECEIVE the 2023-2024 property tax administrative cost recovery report of the Auditor-Controller, FIX March 19, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. for a public hearing on the determination of property tax administrative costs, and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to notify affected local jurisdictions of the public hearing and to prepare and publish the required legal notice and make supporting documentation available for public inspection, as recommended by the County Administrator. Attachments:1. 2023-2024 Property Tax Administration Charges Report .pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Report Title:Property Tax Administration Cost Recovery ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.RECEIVE the 2023-24 report of the Auditor-Controller that contains the property tax-related costs of the Assessor, Tax Collector, Auditor-Controller, and Assessment Appeals Board for the 2022-23 fiscal year, as required by Resolution No. 97/129; 2.FIX March 19, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. for a public hearing on the determination of the property tax administration costs; 3.DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to notify affected local jurisdictions of the public hearing; and 4.DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to prepare and publish the required legal notice and make supporting documentation available for public inspection. FISCAL IMPACT: The report details the property tax-related administrative costs of the County in fiscal year 2022-23 to determine the amount of cost recovery in fiscal year 2023-24. The fiscal year 2022-23 net cost of property tax administration was $18,099,543. This amounts to approximately 0.49% of all the 2022-23 property taxes levied countywide. This cost is allocated to each taxing entity in the County based on net revenues of each entity as a percentage of total revenues. School districts, community college districts, and the County Office of Education are exempt from cost recovery. As a result, the County absorbs the schools’ share, which this year amounts to $8,634,581. The net recovery to the County is $7,338,486. Total cost of property tax administration $18,099,543 Exempt School share of costs -$8,634,581 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0510,Version:1 County share of costs -$2,126,476 Net recovery to the County $7,338,486 BACKGROUND: In 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 97/129 which provides procedures for property tax administration cost recovery. The recommended actions are necessary for implementation of Resolution No. 97/129 for the current fiscal year. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the hearing is not set to consider and adopt the finding of property tax costs, the costs cannot be recovered, resulting in a loss of General Fund revenue in the current fiscal year. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0511 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the Fiscal Year 2023/2024 Phillips Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Return to Source Fund Allocation in the amount of $180,000 for signage and landscape enhancements in Rodeo, Pacheco, and Clyde, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Report Title:Phillips Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Return-to-Source Fund Allocation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE the Fiscal Year 2023/2024 Phillips Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Return to Source Fund Allocation in the amount of $180,000 for signage and landscape enhancements in Rodeo, Pacheco, and Clyde, as recommended by Supervisor Glover. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Fund BACKGROUND: On October 17, 1995, the Board of Supervisors (Board) approved allocating property tax revenues from the Unocal Reformulated Gasoline Projects as a Return-To Source Fund for the purpose of funding projects that would positively impact the economic development in the target communities. On February 15, 2005, the Board approved replacing the source of funding for this fund from the diminishing proceeds of the Reformulated Gasoline Project, with a portion of the property tax increment revenue resulting from the construction of the ConocoPhillips Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Project. A request is being made in FY 2023/2024 for Return-to-Source funding to meet various signage and landscaping needs in the communities of Rodeo, Clyde, and Pacheco. Work for the community of Clyde would include signage installation and landscape improvements including retaining wall and irrigation system repair, sidewalk repair, and tree planting. Pacheco would receive new signage and landscaping on Parker Avenue as well as irrigation and sidewalk repair and graffiti abatement. The community of Rodeo would receive irrigation CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0511,Version:2 repair and landscape improvements (including new trees and shrub planting) as well as removal of old signage. Costs for this work is estimated to be $130,000 for Clyde, $25,000 for Pacheco, and $25,000 for Rodeo. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The wayfinding projects would be delayed until other funding is identified. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0512 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPOINT Warren Lai as the Public Works Director of Contra Costa County at Step 3 of the salary range, including all benefits as provided in the current Management Resolution that apply to the position of Public Works Director, effective February 27, 2024. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Report Title:Appoint Warren Lai as Public Works Director ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPOINT Warren Lai as the Public Works Director of Contra Costa County at Step 3 of the salary range, including all benefits as provided in the current Management Resolution that apply to the position of Public Works Director, effective February 27, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated annual County cost for the position of Public Works Director is $357,600 of which $88,000 is pension costs. All costs are budgeted in the General Fund and recovered through overhead charges to various county and special districts funds. BACKGROUND: The County began a recruitment process with an executive recruitment firm in October 2023. This garnered two applicants who were interviewed. Mr. Lai was one of the two applicants. At the Board meeting of February 6, 2024, the entire Board had an opportunity to interview Mr. Lai. Following the interview, Chair Glover announced that the Board planned to appoint Mr. Lai as Public Works Director at the Board’s next publicly scheduled meeting. This action appoints Warren Lai to the position of Public Works Director, which includes the duties and positions specified in Ordinance Code section 24-22.008. The Department of Public Works includes Capital Projects, Facilities CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0512,Version:2 Maintenance, Engineering Services, Real Estate, Custodial Services, Fleet Services, Materials Management, Print and Mail, Purchasing, Buchanan Field and Byron Airports, Transportation Engineering, Environmental Services, Flood Control, Road and Drainage Maintenance, and the Clean Water Program. These program areas encompass 34 distinct County Funds and 72 distinct Special District Funds. Mr. Lai began working for the Public Works Department in 1998 as an Engineer and was promoted to Associate Civil Engineer, Senior Civil Engineer and Supervising Civil Engineer over the following 13 years. In 2018, Mr. Lai was promoted to Deputy Public Works Director and oversaw various divisions in the department, including Capital Projects Management, Facilities Maintenance, Real Estate, Engineering Services, and the County’s Energy Management Program. Mr. Lai graduated from University of California at Davis with a bachelor of science in Civil Engineering and is a California Licensed Professional Engineer. Mr. Lai will be evaluated by the Board of Supervisors twelve months after appointment. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Public Works Director position would remain vacant. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0513 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RECEIVE public report of litigation settlement agreements that became final during the period January 1, 2024, through January 31, 2024. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Thomas Geiger, County Counsel Report Title:Public report of litigation settlement agreements that became final during the period January 1, 2024, through January 31, 2024. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RECEIVE public report of litigation settlement agreements that became final during the period January 1, 2024, through January 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Settlement amounts are listed below. BACKGROUND: One agreement to settle significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov. Code, § 54956.9(d)(2), became final during the period January 1, 2024, through January 31, 2024. In re Claim of Ronald Dalton and Athena Costis: On December 12, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved a settlement in this property damage claim involving a creek bank. The Board approved the settlement for $125,000 in closed session by a vote of 5 to 0. The settlement agreement was fully executed on January 12, 2024. The funding source is the Risk Management Liability Internal Service Fund. This report includes final settlements of litigation matters handled by the Office of the County Counsel. This report does not include litigation settlements that were reported by the Risk Management Division of the County Administrator’s Office as a consent item on the Board’s open session agenda. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0513,Version:1 The report would not be accepted. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0514 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Counsel, or designee, to execute, a fifth amended and restated legal services contract, effective January 1, 2024, among Soluri Meserve, a Law Corporation, and the Counties of Contra Costa, Solano, and San Joaquin, to pay the firm an amount not to exceed $67,500 in each of 2024 and 2025, for a total contract payment limit of $456,500, for the firm’s legal work for the Delta Counties Coalition through December 31, 2025. (100% Water Agency Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Thomas Geiger, County Counsel Report Title:Amendment to Delta Counties Coalition Legal Services Contract with Soluri Meserve, A Law Corporation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Counsel, or designee, to execute, a fifth amended and restated legal services contract, effective January 1, 2024, among Soluri Meserve, a Law Corporation, and the Counties of Contra Costa, Solano, and San Joaquin, to pay the firm an amount not to exceed $67,500 in each of 2024 and 2025, for a total contract payment limit of $456,500, for the firm’s legal work for the Delta Counties Coalition through December 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Water Agency funds will be used to pay one-fourth of the attorney’s fees and expenses charged by the firm, not to exceed $22,500 annually, for shared Delta Counties Coalition legal work through December 31, 2025. BACKGROUND: Osha Meserve of the law firm Soluri Meserve has represented the Counties of Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Solano on Delta Counties Coalition matters, including non-litigation legal and policy matters connected with the state’s proposed Delta Conveyance Project. Beginning January 1, 2024, Sacramento County began contracting with the firm under a separate services contract, but the firm will continue to perform legal services on behalf of all four counties and divide the cost of those services among the four counties. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0514,Version:1 The fifth amended and restated legal services contract makes the following changes to reflect this new arrangement: Sacramento County is removed as a party; the term is extended through December 31, 2025, and the payment limit is increased to $456,500, to reflect the payment limit for the remaining three counties through 2025; annual payment limits are included to provide that charges for services in each of 2024 and 2025 will not exceed $67,500 per year; terms were added to address shared services performed on behalf of the four counties; and billing and payment terms were revised to ensure the costs for shared services will continue to be divided among the four counties, even though Sacramento has its own contract with the firm. Water Agency staff recommends approving the amendment to ensure the firm can continue to represent all four counties and divide the cost of the firm’s work among those counties, even though Sacramento County will have its own contract with the firm. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The legal services contract would not include terms to reflect coordination of services on behalf of the four counties, and the contract would expire at the end of 2024. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0515 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Counsel, or designee, on behalf of the County and the Contra Costa County Water Agency, to execute a common interest agreement and contracts for legal services with The Freeman Firm, Soluri Meserve, and the Law Office of Roger B. Moore, all effective December 6, 2023, in connection with County of San Joaquin, et al. v. Department of Water Resources, et al. (Sacramento Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 24WM000010). (100% Water Agency Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally To:Board of Supervisors From:Thomas Geiger, County Counsel Report Title:Legal services contracts and common interest agreement for legal services in County of San Joaquin, et al. v. Department of Water Resources, et al. (Sacramento Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 24WM000010). ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Counsel, or designee, on behalf of the County and the Contra Costa County Water Agency, to execute a common interest agreement and contracts for legal services with The Freeman Firm, Soluri Meserve, and the Law Office of Roger B. Moore, all effective December 6, 2023, in connection with County of San Joaquin, et al. v. Department of Water Resources, et al. (Sacramento Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 24WM000010). FISCAL IMPACT: Water Agency funds will be used to pay for these legal services. The County and Water Agency, together, will be charged one fifth of the attorney’s fees and costs charged by each firm. BACKGROUND: On December 13, 2023, the Board authorized the County and Water Agency to join San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo Counties, the Central Delta Water Agency, and Local Agencies of the North Delta (LAND) as co- petitioners in CEQA litigation challenging the Department of Water Resources’ Delta Conveyance Project - County of San Joaquin, et al. v. Department of Water Resources, et al.County of San Joaquin, et al. v. Department of Water Resources, et al. (Sacramento Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 24WM000010). This board order authorizes the County Counsel, or designee, to execute four agreements in connection with that litigation. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0515,Version:1 A common interest agreement will allow the co-petitioners to share privileged litigation-related communications and documents. The Freeman Firm, Soluri Meserve, and the Law Office of Roger B. Moore will represent the co-petitioners in the litigation. The agencies will enter into a legal services contract with each firm, and each contract provides that the firm will charge each agency other than LAND a proportional share of the fees and costs billed by the firm. The firms will charge the following hourly rates: partners, $350-375; associates and contract attorneys, $250-$325; paralegals, $125; and law clerks $50. An exhibit to each contract identifies attorneys and staff assigned to this matter. The exhibit can be replaced by the County Counsel, or designee, when there are staffing changes. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County and Water Agency would not be represented by these firms, and there would be no agreement regarding the sharing of privileged documents and communications among the petitioners in this lawsuit. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0516 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a contract with the ELD Experts LLC, (dba Monarch) in an amount not to exceed $3,489 to purchase and install a camera at the public service counter at the County Clerk-Recorder’s Office for investigative purpose. (100% Recording fees) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Diana Becton, District Attorney Report Title:Terms of Sale - Resale Agreement with ELD Experts LLC, dba Monarch ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a Terms of Sale - Resale Agreement with the ELD Experts LLC, dba Monarch in an amount not to exceed $3,489 to purchase and install a camera at the public service counter at the County Clerk-Recorder’s Office for investigative purpose. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in expenditures of up to $3,489 and will be funded by the Department’s Real Estate Fraud Prevention Special Fund. There is no General Fund impact. BACKGROUND: The District Attorney’s Office will purchase a camera from ELD Experts LLC, dba Monarch to be installed at the public service counter at the County Clerk-Recorder’s Office. The purchase and installation of the camera is for investigative purpose with the goal to have an investigative tool to capture potential fraudulent transactions at the Clerk-Recorder’s office. Approval of the Terms of Sale - Resale Agreement will allow the District Attorney’s Office to use this tool for investigative purpose. This Terms of Sale - Resale Agreement includes Limitations of Liability and indemnification to hold Monarch harmless from any claims arising out of the performance under this agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without executing the Terms of Sale - Resale Agreement with ELD Experts LLC, dba Monarch, the District Attorney’s Office cannot utilize the tool needed to capture potential fraudulent transactions at the recorder’s CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0516,Version:1 office for investigative purpose. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0517 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a contract with Amped Software USA., Inc. in an amount not to exceed $2,475 for the continued usage of a proprietary forensic image and video processing software for investigative purpose. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Diana Becton, District Attorney Report Title:Purchased License Agreement with Amped Software USA., Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a Purchased License Agreement with Amped Software USA., Inc. in an amount not to exceed $2,475 for the continued usage of a proprietary forensic image and video processing software AMPED 5 for investigative purpose. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in expenditures of up to $2,475 which has been included in the Department’s FY23-24 Budget. BACKGROUND: The District Attorney’s Office uses a proprietary forensic image and video processing software AMPED 5 to convert, restore, enhance, measure and present digital media (all in one package). DA employees uses the software to prepare and clarify video for Jury Trail as well assist outside agencies in their investigations. The software also generates a report at the end to show what was done to the final production video. Approval of the Purchased License Agreement will allow the District Attorney’s Office to continue to use this forensic software for investigative purpose. This Purchased License Agreement includes indemnification for the licensor to hold licensee harmless from any claims arising out of the performance under this agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without executing the Purchased License Agreement with Amped Software USA., Inc, the District Attorney’s Office cannot continue to utilize the forensic image and video processing software for investigative purpose. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0517,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0518 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:10/10/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa Economic Partnership, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $585,000 to provide program implementation of the Healthcare Initiative with the Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County for the period December 1, 2023, through March 31, 2026. (100% State) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Contract with Contra Costa Economic Partnership, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Contra Costa Economic Partnership, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $585,000 to provide program implementation of the Healthcare Initiative with the Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County for the period December 1, 2023, through March 31, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: $585,000: Funded 100% by California Workforce Development Board (CWDB) High Road Training Partnership (HRTP): Resilient Workforce Program, which is budgeted in FY 2023-24 for $244,000, will be budgeted in FY 2024-25 for $261,229, and the remaining $79,771 will be budgeted for FY 2025-26. No County match required. BACKGROUND: Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County (WDBCCC) was awarded the high road training partnership grant to scale the implementation of the Healthcare Initiative on August 9, 2023. In June of 2023, in alignment with County policy and WIOA guidelines, the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) WDBCCC issued a Request for Interest (RFI) 763 to procure proposals from community-based organizations to expand healthcare pathways. This process included a competitive procurement where Contra Costa Economic Partnership, Inc. (CCEP) was selected and approved by the WDB Executive Committee on nd CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0518,Version:1 August 22nd, 2023. CCEP shall provide leadership, program management and program implementation of Healthcare Initiative Management Services for the regional sector strategy for WDBCCC. CCEP shall advance the Healthcare Initiative by working with relevant stakeholders including educational institutions, healthcare industry employers, labor unions, and community-based organizations across the County, to increase training opportunities, expand paid work-based learning opportunities and to enhance the Contra Costa workforce development systems strategies in healthcare. Funding for the WDB’s Healthcare Initiative may come from braided funding such as High Road Training Partnership (HRTP); Workforce Accelerator Fund (WAF); and Division of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS). CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The services provided under this contract support three of the five of Contra Costa County’s community outcomes: (3) "Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families” by providing career support services for families of adult and dislocated workers. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If WDBCCC does not contract this out to a CBO, WDBCCC will not be able to fulfill its obligations of the HRTP grant partnership. The grant award could be rescinded, putting the services under the HRTP partnership, WIOA performance and grant requirements in jeopardy. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0519 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:10/20/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Director, a purchase order with SurveyMonkey Inc. in an amount not to exceed $24,830 for the purchase of survey management software to provide survey capabilities for the period October 29, 2023, through October 28, 2024. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:SurveyMonkey Subscription Renewal ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a Purchase Order with SurveyMonkey Inc. in an amount not to exceed $24,830 for the purchase of survey management software to provide survey capabilities for the period October 29, 2023, through October 28, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: $24,830 (59% Federal; 35% State; 6% County General Fund), all of which is budgeted in FY 23-24. BACKGROUND: The Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) seeks to renew its survey management software that will enable the department to securely survey its customers. This enables EHSD to obtain timely and relevant information on the community it serves. This purchase order includes a service agreement that includes a mutual indemnification clause. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0519,Version:1 The software provided under this purchase supports all five community outcomes established in the Children’s Report Card: (1) "Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; (2) "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood"; (3) "Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families” by providing EHSD staff timely and accurate information about its customers. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will not be able to maintain its survey capability with Survey Monkey. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0520 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:10/24/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Evident Change, in an amount not to exceed $286,871 to provide SafeMeasures child welfare reporting services for the period of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2028. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Contract with Evident Change for SafeMeasures Reporting Service ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Evident Change, in an amount not to exceed $286,871 to provide SafeMeasures child welfare reporting services for the period of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2028. FISCAL IMPACT: $286,871 (Federal 59%; State 35%; County General Fund 6%), $47,811 of which is budgeted in FY 24-25; $95,625 of which will be budgeted in FY 25-26; $95,625 of which will be budgeted in FY 26-27; and $47,810 of which will be budgeted in FY 27-28. BACKGROUND: SafeMeasures is the most widely used system in California for monitoring compliance with Federal and State case practice and outcome measures.Evident Change’s unique services give grounds for sole source justification.The Employment and Human Services Department has utilized the SafeMeasures Internet Reporting Services (SafeMeasures) system since 2004. On September 11,2007,the Board of Supervisors approved item C.114 to execute a contract with the National Council on Crime and Delinquency in an amount not to exceed $74,250 to provide SafeMeasures Quality Assurance Reporting services for the period January 13,2008 through December 31,2009.Subsequent contracts for SafeMeasures have been below $200,000, and have not required Board action. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0520,Version:1 CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: SafeMeasures supports two of the five community outcomes established in the Children’s Report Card: (4) “Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing”; and (5) “Communities that are Save and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families” by providing reporting outcomes to identify abused children so they can receive appropriate support and follow-up services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will not receive line and management staff information that cannot be obtained from the system of record, CWS/CMS (Child Welfare Services/Case Management System). CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0521 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/23/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Community Tech Network, a nonprofit agency, in an amount not to exceed $447,000 to provide services and tablets to seniors and adults with disabilities funded under the Access to Technology Grant Program for the period February 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024. (100% State) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Access to Technology Agreement with Community Tech Network ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services (EHSD) Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Community Tech Network, a nonprofit agency, in an amount not to exceed $447,000 to provide services and tablets to seniors and adults with disabilities funded under the Access to Technology (ATT) Grant Program for the period February 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: $447,000: Funded 100% by state funds through an agreement with the California Department of Aging (CDA) for the Home and Community Based Services grant. BACKGROUND: In 2021,Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB)135 into law,which added Welfare &Institutions Code (WIC) section 9104 requiring CDA to create the Access to Technology (ATT)program.ATT aims to meet the needs of older persons aged 60+and adults with disabilities to gain access to digital connectivity and technology to reduce isolation, increasesocialconnections,andenhanceself-confidenceinnavigatingdigitalandonlineresources.CDAawardedEHSD $1,449,700 in ATT grant to bridge the digital divide and reduce isolation among seniors and adults with disabilities in ContraCostaCounty.Throughthisagreement,CommunityTechNetworkwilldisseminatedigitalequipment,delivertech literacytrainingsdirectlytoprogramparticipants,andconducttrain-thetrainersessionswithpartneragencyvolunteersand staff to enable continuity of programs. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0521,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without this agreement, seniors and persons with disabilities will not be able to access digital technology equipment and trainings. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0522 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/23/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with KinderCare Learning Centers LLC to increase the payment limit by $226,026 to an amount not to exceed $1,120,015 to provide Head Start and Early Head Start services, and State General Childcare program services, with no change to term July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. (51% Federal, 49% State) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Contract Amendment with KinderCare Learning Centers ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with KinderCare Learning Centers LLC to increase the payment limit by $226,026 to a new amount not to exceed $1,120,015 to provide Head Start and Early Head Start services, and State General Childcare program services, with no change to term July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: $226,026; funded by 51% Federal grant funds from the Administration for Children and Families (Head Start and Early Head Start programs) and 49% State funds through the California Department of Education, all of which is budgeted for in FY 2023-2024. There is no County match requirement. BACKGROUND: This contract amendment is to pass through cost-of-living (COLA) adjustments received by the department from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (ACF). Contra Costa County receives funds from ACF to provide Head Start and Early Head Start services to program eligible County residents. The Employment and Human Services Department, in turn, contracts with several community-based organizations to provide a wider distribution of services. On May 16, 2023, (C.36), the Board approved KinderCare contract renewal for the period July 1, 2023, through CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0522,Version:1 June 30, 2024, with a total payment limit of $893,989. On March 15, 2023, Administration for Child & Families provided COLA & Quality Improvement Funding Guidance letter to the Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD). The COLA supports a 5.60 percent adjustment increase from the previous fiscal year pay scales for Head Start and Early Head Start. The Board of Supervisors approved and authorized this increase in revenue for the Head Start and Early Head Start funds on April 18, 2023 (C.48). In addition to the pass through of COLA funding, KinderCare LLC will provide additional services at a new childcare center, Lone Tree Way KinderCare, effective January 15, 2024. This contract amendment is also for the addition of 44 childcare program slots. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the County will not be able to increase funds for childcare slots for its community-based agency partner, KinderCare Learning Centers LLC. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The Employment and Human Services Department Community Services Bureau supports three of Contra Costa County’s community outcomes - Outcome 1: Children Ready for and Succeeding in School, Outcome 3: Families that are Economically Self-sufficient, and Outcome 4: Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0523 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Director, a purchase order with R-Computer in an amount not to exceed $15,300 and an Articulate Global, LLC End User License Agreement for the period November 21, 2023 through June 30, 2025 for the purchase of Articulate licenses. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Purchase of Articulate software ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Director, a purchase order with R-Computer in an amount not to exceed $15,300 and an Articulate Global, LLC End-User License Agreement for the period November 21, 2023 through June 30, 2025 for the purchase of Articulate licenses. FISCAL IMPACT: $15,300 (59% Federal; 35% State; 6% County General Fund), $6,120 of which is budgeted in FY 23-24, and $9,180 of which will be budgeted in FY 24-25. BACKGROUND: Articulate learning management software generates interactive and engaging training content quickly and efficiently for use in staff development. Approval of this action will allow the Employment and Human Services Department to utilize this software to develop interactive training content. The purchase includes a service agreement that includes a mutual Indemnification clause which has been approved by County Counsel. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: This agreement/contract supports all five of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: (1) "Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; (2) "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0523,Version:1 Productive Adulthood";(3) "Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families,” by supporting staff working directly with families and children. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will be restricted in its ability to develop interactive learning content. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0524 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept grant funding and execute an agreement with the Employment Training Panel in an amount not to exceed $741,040 to administer a healthcare workforce training program for the period March 1, 2024 through March 30, 2027. (100% State, no County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title: Employment Training Panel (ETP) HWAF Revenue Agreement ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services director, or designee, to accept a grant in the amount of $741,040 and execute an agreement from Employment Training Panel to administer a healthcare workforce training program for the period March 1, 2024 through March 30, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue totaling $741,040, sourced entirely from State funds (100%), has been allocated for the fiscal year 2023-2024 budget. Any unutilized funds from this allocation will be designated for appropriation in the proposed budget for fiscal year 2024-2025. No County match is necessary for this allocation. BACKGROUND: California Labor and Workforce Agency Employment Training Panel (ETP) funding supports customized worker training and skill upgrading of employer’s current workers increasing high-wage positions and advancing career-track workforce training for disproportionately affected communities. The Healthcare Workforce Advancement Fund Program (HWAF) concentrates on individuals that are unemployed at the start of training and placed into qualifying full-time employment and current workers in entry level healthcare jobs seeking upskilling or licensing for career advancement opportunities. Workplace settings include hospital, primary care, and community settings. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval, participants and employers relying on ETP training funds will not have access to industry driven job trainings or skill upgrading that lead to self-sufficiency, adversely impacting participants ability to self-sustain within the community. Local businesses will have fewer qualified candidates for positions, and the local WDB will have failed to utilize training funds. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0524,Version:1 CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The services provided under revenue agreement support three community outcomes established in the Children’s Report Card: (3)"Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families” by providing training and employment opportunities for in- school and out-of-school youth. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0525 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a revenue agreement in an amount not to exceed $749,675, with California Labor and Workforce Agency Employment Training Panel, to administer a workforce training program for the period February 28, 2024 through October 29, 2025. (100% State, no County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Employment Training Panel (ETP) CORE Revenue Agreement ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a revenue agreement in the amount of $749,675, with California Labor and Workforce Agency Employment Training Panel, to administer a workforce training program for the period February 28, 2024 through October 29, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue totaling $749,675, sourced entirely from State funds (100%), has been allocated for the fiscal year 2023-2024 budget. Any unutilized funds from this allocation will be designated for appropriation in the proposed budget for the fiscal year 2024-2025. No County match is necessary for this allocation. BACKGROUND: California Labor and Workforce Agency Employment Training Panel (ETP) funding supports customized worker training and skill upgrading of employer’s current workers increasing high-wage positions and advancing career-track workforce training for disproportionately affected communities. ETP training funds are disbursed pursuant to California Insurance Code §10200 et seq. The Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County with this grant aims to support training programs designed for individuals from underserved communities in Contra Costa County, particularly people of color, to advance from entry-level to higher positions within the healthcare sector. It encompasses assistance in covering substantial expenses related to facilitating EMTs in obtaining the licenses and preceptor training essential for transitioning to Paramedics. Additionally, it supports entry-level Medical Assistants in acquiring the necessary training and certifications to progress to the level of Medical Assistant II. Furthermore, this funding initiative aims to enhance the diversity representation within emergency and medical services personnel, ensuring they better mirror the vibrant communities they serve. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0525,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval, participants and employers relying on ETP training funds will not have access to industry driven job trainings or skill upgrading that lead to self-sufficiency, adversely impacting participants ability to self-sustain within the community. Local businesses will have fewer qualified candidates for positions, and the local Workforce Development Board will have failed to utilize training funds. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The services provided under this revenue agreement support three community outcomes established in the Children’s Report Card: (3) "Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families” by providing training and employment opportunities for in- school and out-of-school youth. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0526 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the California Department of Social Services California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids System Improvement Plan for the period of February 2024 through June 2026, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director, and AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign the System Improvement Plan. Attachments:1. AppendixA-CalOAR Report SignOffSheet, 2. Contra Costa EHSD WFS Cal-SIP 2021-2026 Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Approve the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) Outcomes and Accountability Review System Improvement Plan (Cal-SIP) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: CONSIDER approving the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) System Improvement Plan (Cal-SIP) for the period of February 2024 through June 2026, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Established by Senate Bill 89 (Chapter 24, Statutes of 2017) and codified in Welfare and Institutions Code section 11523, the CalWORKs Outcomes and Accountability Review (Cal-OAR) was developed by the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) in partnership with various stakeholders to establish a local, data-driven continuous quality improvement cycle designed to deliver better participant outcomes and best practice replication in the Welfare to Work program. The Cal-OAR consists of three main components: performance measures, a CalWORKs County Self- Assessment (Cal-CSA) process, and a county Cal-SIP. The Cal-OAR continuous quality improvement (Cal- CQI) process (which includes the Cal-CSA and Cal-SIP) takes place over five-year cycles. The first Cal-OAR cycle commenced on July 1, 2021, with the implementation of Cal-OAR. The Cal-SIP is the second component CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0526,Version:1 of the Cal-OAR CQI process. The Cal-SIP focuses on improving targeted performance measures and includes a goal, strategies, and action steps for each targeted measure. The CDSS has approved the plan that is now submitted for Board consideration. Board approval of the Cal-SIP is required before the implementation of the plan can begin. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Should the proposed action not be approved by the Board of Supervisors, the County’s EHSD WFS Bureau will be delayed in implementation of the outlined strategies and action steps associated with each goal to improve the targeted performance measures and may cause failure to adhere to submission deliverables and deadlines in accordance with CDSS regulations. Approval is recommended as the intent of the plan is to improve long-term stability outcomes for Contra Costa County CalWORKs recipients in alignment with the intent of Senate Bill 89, and Board approval is needed to begin implementation. CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT: This report supports number 3 of Contra Costa County’s community outcomes of the Children’s Report Card”, (1) "Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; (2) "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive Adulthood"; (3) "Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families” CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ July 2021- June 2026 CalWORKs Outcomes & Accountability Review System Improvement Plan (Cal-SIP) 1 CalWORKs County System Improvement Plan (Cal-SIP) Report County: Contra Costa Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 2 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Section 1: Measures for Improvement and Strategies .................................................................................... 8 Part 1: Measure and Goal Narrative .............................................................................................................. 8 Part 2: Goal-level Descriptions ...................................................................................................................... 9 Section 2: Peer Review ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Section 3: Target Measure Summary ............................................................................................................... 19 2 Executive Summary 1. Please summarize the performance measures selected for improvement. The performance measures the County Welfare Department (CWD) will focus on during the first Cal-OAR cycle are increasing the OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate, reducing the Sanction Rate, and increasing the First Activity Attendance Rate. Please refer to the responses in the Measure and Goal Narrative for additional information. 2. Please provide a comprehensive list of improvement strategies identified within the Cal-SIP. Goal 1: Increase OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate to 21% from 17%. The CWD seeks to improve performance by implementing the following four strategies to increase the OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate: Strategy 1: Improve timeliness of referring eligible participants to WTW upon CalWORKs approval. Action Steps: • Through training and policy issuances, reinforce the requirement to refer CalWORKs approved cases with Stage 1 childcare to WTW the same day approved and expand requirement to all WTW eligible participants. • Support the operational business process that exempt WTW participants are to be referred to WTW to monitor exemption through ongoing training and policy reminders. • At the initial eligibility determination to add an adult to an ongoing CalWORKs case, the CalWORKs worker will refer the individual to WTW as appropriate. Strategy 2: Schedule participant's WTW OCAT/Appraisal in a timelier manner. Action Steps: • Expand outreach efforts that educate participants about the WTW program, available supportive services, and incentives. During the outreach, staff will offer the customer various options for OCAT/Appraisal appointment times. • Utilize operational reports to monitor WTW referrals and OCAT/Appraisal scheduling dates. • Through training and policy issuances, reiterate the required timeframes for scheduling WTW OCAT/Appraisal upon CalWORKs approval. 3 Strategy 3: Reinforce policy for staff through internal Staff Development training and issuance of policy documents. Action Steps: • Through refresher trainings and policy issuances, remind staff of the operational referral process from CalWORKs to WTW. • Conduct ongoing monitoring to review referral timeliness compliance. • Incorporate Welfare-to-Work policy in CalWORKs training provided by Staff Development. Strategy 4: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to the timely delivery of the OCAT/Appraisal. Action Steps: • Review and analyze disaggregated data provided by CDSS and other available sources to determine if and which subpopulation of the CalWORKs/Welfare to Work program is underserved. • Conduct root cause analysis, including partner and collaborator engagement to determine the root cause of disparities/gaps in the following areas, but not limited to service delivery, policies, and business processes. • Develop strategies and actions steps that aim to close the gaps on disparity findings. • Include strategies, action steps, and any other pertinent information in Progress Report #1 due on 02/21/2025. Goal 2: Decrease Sanction Rate to 11% from 13%. The CWD seeks to improve performance by implementing the following four strategies to decrease the Sanction Rate: Strategy 1: Cure sanction at time of CalWORKs application. Action Steps: • At CalWORKs Intake and redetermination, WTW staff will coordinate curing the WTW sanction at CalWORKs interview. • The WTW worker and participant will review and complete the WTW curing sanction forms (WTW 29 and WTW 2). • During the curing sanction process, the WTW worker will conduct WTW orientation and OCAT/Appraisal with the participant. • During every CalWORKs intake and redetermination, CalWORKs staff will explain the benefits of participating in WTW, available supportive services, Stage 1 Child Care, etc. • At CalWORKs approval, the assigned CalWORKs worker will cure the WTW sanction and begin aiding previously sanctioned participant. 4 Strategy 2: Provide additional flexibility when participants are unable to engage in WTW activity before initiating WTW sanction. Action Steps: • WTW Workers will be assigned a monthly targeted number of WTW sanctioned participants to contact for WTW reengagement. • Establish a participant text message campaign to cure sanctions. • Increase participant education re: WTW supportive services, childcare, support when attending school, etc. • Remind staff through policy issuances to utilize all available resources for sanctioned participants. • Reinstate home visits / outreach by ES/SW for WTW participants to assist in curing sanctions. Strategy 3: Reinforce policy for staff through internal Staff Development training and issuance of policy documents. Action Steps: • Provide staff training to reinforce strategies on reengagement and the WTW curing sanction process. • Publish All Staff communications, other materials, and videos to educate staff Strategy 4: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to sanctioning WTW participants. Action Steps: • Review and analyze disaggregated data provided by CDSS and other available sources to determine if and which subpopulation of the CalWORKs/Welfare to Work program is sanctioned at a higher rate compared to overall. • Conduct root cause analysis, including partner and collaborator engagement to determine the root cause of disparities/gaps in the following areas, but not limited to service delivery, policies, and business processes. • Develop strategies and actions steps that aim to close the gaps on disparity findings. • Include strategies, action steps, and any other pertinent information in Progress Report #1 due on 02/21/2025. Goal 3: Increase First Activity Attendance Rate to 64% from 62%. The CWD seeks to improve performance by implementing the following three strategies to increase the First Activity Attendance Rate: Strategy 1: Increase outreach to educate participants about scheduled appointments with their WTW worker and activity attendance. 5 Action Steps: • Establish text messages to remind participants of appointments and start of activities. • Implement a process for staff to conduct a check-in call with participants prior to start of their activity to answer any questions and remind them of supportive services and childcare. Strategy 2: Provide more upfront transportation & other supportive services to support participant activity engagement. Action Steps: • Upon assignment of case, contact participant by telephone to encourage WTW activity attendance and discuss transportation, Stage 1 Child Care, and other available supportive services. • Ensure participant has necessary resources to select Stage 1 Child Care provider through referrals to our local Resource and Referral Agency. • Increase marketing of available incentives & continue to issue incentives based on activity enrollment & participation. Strategy 3: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to first activity attendance. Action Steps: • Review and analyze disaggregated data provided by CDSS and other available sources to determine if and which subpopulation of the CalWORKs/Welfare to Work program is underserved. • Conduct root cause analysis, including partner and collaborator engagement to determine the root cause of disparities/gaps in the following areas, but not limited to service delivery, policies, and business processes. • Develop strategies and actions steps that aim to close the gaps on disparity findings. • Include strategies, action steps, and any other pertinent information in Progress Report #1 due on 02/21/2025. 6 Introduction The CalWORKs Outcomes and Accountability Review (Cal-OAR) is a local, data-driven program management system that facilitates continuous improvement of county CalWORKs programs by collecting, analyzing, and disseminating outcomes and best practices. As required by Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) 11523, Cal-OAR consists of three core components: performance indicators, a county CalWORKs self- assessment (Cal-CSA), and a CalWORKs system improvement plan (Cal-SIP). The Cal-OAR continuous quality improvement (Cal-CQI) process (which includes the Cal-CSA and Cal-SIP) takes place over five-year cycles. The first Cal-OAR cycle commenced on July 1, 2021, with the implementation of Cal-OAR. The Cal-SIP is the second component of the Cal-OAR CQI process. The Cal-SIP is based on the information gathered and reported from the Cal-CSA, wherein each CWD will develop a plan for improving their CalWORKs program. The Cal-SIP will select a measure or set of measures for focused improvements and development to improve the selected performance measures while pairing each Cal-SIP goal with an equity goal and/ or strategy. 1. Describe your approach to the Cal-SIP Report. Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) County Welfare Department (CWD) hereinafter referred to as CWD, established a core Cal-OAR team whose members include the Work Participation Rate (WPR) Program Analyst, CalWORKs Program Analyst, Welfare-to-Work Childcare Program Analyst and two Workforce Services Specialists who convened to discuss preliminary planning and the approach of completing the CalWORKs System Improvement Plan (Cal-SIP). The core CalWORKs Outcomes and Accountability Review (Cal-OAR) team attended all Mathematica led Cal-SIP trainings and coaching sessions and met regularly with the assigned County Department of Social Services (CDSS) Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Specialist when clarification on Cal-SIP questions was necessary. The Cal-OAR team’s Workforce Services Specialist served as the Cal-OAR Team Lead and ensured compliance with internal and CDSS submission deadlines. The core Cal-OAR team convened regular in-person and virtual meetings with program staff to discuss Cal-OAR and gather feedback for the development of the strategies and action steps. The core Cal-OAR team utilized tools provided by the CDSS and the Cal-OAR website to plan and draft the Cal-SIP report. Tools were modified to adapt to the CWD's specific and unique needs, including internal timelines, partner and collaborator participation, engagement processes, and available reports for tracking purposes. The CWD approached the Cal-SIP as an opportunity for the Workforce Services (WFS) Bureau to further examine the current CalWORKs program, barrier removal services, and supportive services focusing on specific performance measures that will produce the most effective outcomes for the current Cal- OAR cycle. Additionally, partner and collaborator engagement resulted in strengthening existing relationships for continuous quality improvement and support for customers served by all agencies involved. 7 2. Briefly describe past and current system improvement efforts. The CWD partnered with the Sanctuary Institute to learn about trauma-informed interview methods which includes trauma awareness, adverse childhood experiences, building trauma awareness, and practicing self-care. The CWD trained staff on these methods to enhance existing participant services and employee self-care. Additionally, the CWD enhanced the use of the CalWORKs 2.0 tools to expand trauma-informed and motivational interviewing methods to assist customers in identifying personal and family goals while supporting efforts to become work ready. These efforts include working directly with local Adult Schools and Community Colleges to advocate and support participant engagement in obtaining General Educational Development (GED) certification, pursuing further education and training courses, and enroll ing in English as a Second Language (ESL) courses while providing the necessary supportive services to ensure successful participation. The CWD also strengthened the partnership with the local Adult Schools to include job readiness and job search education which assists participants in identifying desired educational and/or career paths that lead to self- sufficiency. 3. Briefly describe the success or failure of those efforts at improving service delivery or programmatic outcomes. The CWD is committed to trauma-informed interviewing and believes that it is essential to how customers are engaged. The CWD also believes that our work with community partners, including local Adult Schools and Community Colleges, has been fruitful. We anticipate that these approaches will improve participant engagement and outcomes, particularly now that blanket good cause policies, which were enacted due to the pandemic, have been lifted. Feedback from participants, community partners and internal staff has helped the CWD identify gaps, needs and best practices. Based on participant forums hosted by CWD staff, it was shared that the flexibility during the pandemic supported our families in engaging in activities. It was also shared that the expansion of in-person appointments and implementation of virtual and hybrid options greatly increased participants' abilities to attend scheduled meetings due to limitations from the pandemic and other external causes. 4. An overview of the CWD’s organizational vision and mission (optional). The Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department vision is to continue to be a thriving community where all individuals and families can be healthy, safe, secure, and self-sufficient. Our mission is to partner with the community to deliver quality services to ensure access to resources that support, protect, and empower individuals and families to achieve self-sufficiency. 8 Section 1: Measures for Improvement and Strategies Part 1: Measure and Goal Narrative 1. Describe the reason for selecting the measure or programmatic grouping of measures. The CWD identified the OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate, Sanction Rate, and First Activity Attendance Rate as areas needing improvement based upon the Cal- OAR Performance Measure reports and internal case management reports. The process of referring cases at CalWORKs approval to Welfare-to-Work (WTW) is an area needing improvement. Strategies noted throughout this Cal-SIP will be implemented to decrease our Sanction Rate to ensure participants are provided maximum opportunities to engage in WTW while receiving barrier removal and job skills development services to assist in achieving self-sufficiency. Additionally, ensuring participants are educated about the benefits of WTW engagement, including receipt of transportation supportive services, Stage 1 Childcare, and other ancillary supportive services while attending activities is an area in which we identified an opportunity for growth. 2. Do partners and collaborators agree this is a measure or programmatic grouping of measures that should be focused on at this time? In-depth discussions took place with partners and collaborators who provided insight and feedback on the identified measures. Recommendations to expand virtual appointment options and work further with partners to reduce WTW sanctions were shared to assist the CWD in developing strategies for targeted improvement and have been incorporated in the strategies and action steps outlined throughout the Cal-SIP. 3. Describe any anticipated interactions with other measures. WTW engagement measures intersect as each performance measure addresses an area of the participant's time receiving assistance. The Sanction Rate directly impacts the Engagement Rate, whether it be the OCAT/Appraisal Timeliness Completion Rate or the First Activity Participation Rate as initial engagement leads to subsequent engagement or lack thereof. As the CWD works toward reducing the Sanction Rate and engages participants in a shorter amount of time, efforts will be reflected in other performance measures both directly and indirectly. 4. Describe how the CWD will track performance measure improvement. The CWD will continue to utilize Cal-OAR Performance Measure reports and the Cal-OAR data dashboard. Additionally, the CWD will utilize internal ad-hoc and eXemplar reports, internal surveys, and discussions with customers, while continually meeting with staff to identify strategies to reduce sanctions and overall increase engagement. The Cal-OAR team will meet regularly to review the progress of the Cal-SIP and host regular meetings with internal staff and external partners to share the identified improvements and strategies developed to positively impact the performance measures. 9 Part 2: Goal-level Descriptions Goal 1: Increase OCAT/ Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate to 21% from 17%. Review using Cal-OAR dashboard and county reports improving by 1.0% every 6 months within 2 years (for a total of a 4.0% improvement). • Strategy 1: Improve on the timeliness of referring eligible participants to WTW upon CalWORKs approval. • Strategy 2: Schedule participant's WTW OCAT/Appraisal in a timelier manner. • Strategy 3: Reinforce policy for staff through internal Staff Development training and issuance of policy documents. • Strategy 4: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to the timely delivery of the OCAT. 1. Explain the reasoning or methodology which was used to determine this goal. The OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate was identified as a challenge in this review period which occurred during the pandemic. Participants were given blanket good cause from participating in WTW due to employment barriers and resource limitations during the pandemic which resulted in fewer participants engaging in WTW. This directly impacted the CWD's ability to consistently conduct WTW OCAT/Appraisals with participants. Additionally, through evaluation of the disaggregated Cal-OAR data, the CWD identified a delay in referring newly approved CalWORKs cases to WTW. 2. What led the CWD to these improvement strategies? Based on our internal data and Cal-OAR data, management reviews, and evaluation of operational business processes, a timeliness deficiency was identified in referring newly approved CalWORKs cases to WTW in addition to scheduling participants for the WTW OCAT/Appraisal. Efforts will be made to improve in these areas by providing policy support, training for staff through the CWD Staff Development unit, and regular monitoring. 3. Discuss any research or literature that supports the strategies chosen. Cite reference(s), if applicable. Utilizing the CalWORKs 2.0 model, the CWD will enhance the "goal, plan, do, review" process at WTW OCAT/Appraisal. The CWD will continue to utilize CDSS and Mathematica resources to support improvements in engagement in WTW OCAT/Appraisal through the noted science-based goal achievement framework. The CWD will continue to utilize motivational interviewing techniques to engage families. Additionally, the CWD will explore further marketing techniques for job readiness and other appropriate activities while aligning activities to the participant's personal and family goals. 10 References: Mathematica. CalWORKs 2.0. Retrieved 28, August 2023. https://calworksnextgen.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/calworks20reference.pdf UC Davis. CalWORKs 2.0 and Meaningful Welfare-to-Work Plans. Retrieved 23, August 2023. https://humanservices.ucdavis.edu/course/calworks-20-and-meaningful-welfare- work-plans 4. Describe the roles of each partner and collaborator in implementing the selected strategies. The role of partners and collaborators was to participate through various stakeholder meetings and surveys. Additionally, our community partners collaborate with the CWD to provide direct participant activities and services. Shared perspectives from partners and collaborators were fundamental in identifying the CWDs gaps and strategies. Through these meetings, our partners and collaborators were able to provide feedback an d offer ideas for improving the referral process and scheduling the WTW OCAT/Appraisal. The CWD will continue to meet with partners and collaborators on a regular basis to gather ongoing feedback and ideas. Additionally, the CWD will continue to host focus groups through our Policy & Planning unit, evaluate the outcomes, and utilize various reports which will allow the CWD to analyze real-time data and quickly pivot as necessary. 5. Identify any staff education and training needs, and include any technical assistance needed to implement strategy and achieve goal. Expanding current training curriculum to include more in-depth WTW training for CalWORKs and WTW staff is the first step in our strategy. Through collaboration with our internal Staff Development unit, we can target the areas needing the most improvement and train staff to understand the gaps and contribution they can make to enhance participant services. Additionally, the CWD will utilize the Cal-OAR data toolkits and reports offered by the CDSS. We will also meet with our CDSS CQI Specialist and the CDSS Cal-OAR team for additional clarification on the Cal-SIP process, CQI methods, and data questions as needed. 6. Describe how the CWD plans to mitigate and/or address both known internal and external barriers to achieve this goal. The CWD will continue to explore WTW program marketing techniques to better inform participants of the program and connect those participants with program services and activity opportunities. Additionally, the CWD plans to expand participant outreach efforts through text messaging, social media campaigns, and increased telephone contacts. The Policy & Planning unit will assist with participant outreach to garner feedback on areas needing improvement. Additionally, through training, reports, and improved case management, internal barriers will be closely monitored, and changes made as necessary to improve timely referrals to WTW from CalWORKs approval and appointment scheduling for WTW OCAT/Appraisal. Furthermore, the Policy & Planning unit will regularly evaluate OCAT/Appraisal timeliness and compare to the disaggregated data to identify any areas of inequity and need for improvement. We are investigating if 11 it would improve our referral process to utilize the CalSAWS auto-assignment of cases from CalWORKs intake approval to WTW. 7. Describe how your facility will continuously evaluate each action step taken to see if improvement is being achieved. (e.g., tracking tools, meetings, monitoring, etc.) Include who will be responsible for follow-up and compliance. The CWD will continue to explore WTW program marketing techniques to better inform participants of the program and connect those participants with program services and activity opportunities. Additionally, the CWD plans to expand participant outreach efforts through text messaging, social media campaigns, and increased telephone contacts. The Policy & Planning unit will assist with participant outreach to garner feedback on areas needing improvement. Additionally, through training, reports, and improved case management, internal barriers will be closely monitored, and changes made as necessary to improve timely referrals to WTW from CalWORKs approval and appointment scheduling for WTW OCAT/Appraisal. Furthermore, the Policy & Planning unit will regularly evaluate OCAT/Appraisal timeliness and compare to the disaggregated data to identify any areas of inequity and need for improvement. We are investigating if it would improve our referral process to utilize the CalSAWS auto-assignment of cases from CalWORKs intake approval to WTW. Goal 2: Decrease Sanction Rate to 11% from 13%. Review using Cal-OAR dashboard and county reports improving by 0.5% every 6 months within 2 years (for a total of a 2.0% improvement). • Strategy 1: Cure sanction at time of CalWORKs application. • Strategy 2: Provide additional flexibility when participants are unable to engage in WTW activity before initiating WTW sanction. • Strategy 3: Reinforce policy for staff through internal Staff Development training and issuance of policy documents. • Strategy 4: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to sanctioning WTW participants. 1. Explain the reasoning or methodology which was used to determine this goal. During the review period, the CWD conducted an analysis of the Cal-OAR disaggregate WTW sanction (financial penalty) data and then investigated the cause and resolution, some of which was identified as participants being excused from WTW engagement due to the pandemic. Through outreach efforts, the CWD attempted to work with participants through WTW engagement; however, a significant number of participants did not respond to the CWD's request to resolve their sanction. Additionally, the CWD identified an opportunity to expand participant program education, WTW re-engagement outreach, and access to the supportive services available to support engagement. 12 This will allow the CWD to streamline the process for participants and strengthen the partnership between our CalWORKs and WTW staff during the CalWORKs interview appointment. 2. What led the CWD to these improvement strategies? The CWD's current business process was evaluated, and it was determined that addressing WTW sanctions at CalWORKs intake prior to approval will afford participants the opportunity to receive a higher cash grant, access available supportive services, and assist the CWD in achieving a lower WTW Sanction Rate. CWD staff will offer more appointment scheduling flexibility for the participant to discuss their current situation and possible barrier(s) leading to the non-compliance. The CWD will provide additional training and policy to staff on re-engagement strategies, identifying barriers, and setting goals with activity flexibilities in mind. 3. Discuss any research or literature that supports the strategies chosen. Cite reference(s), if applicable. The CWD has includes best practices used by other counties who have a lower Sanction Rate including focusing on re-engaging participants before imposing WTW sanctions. This includes more robust application of the CalWORKs 2.0 methodology and trauma-informed interviewing techniques. Additionally, by taking a comprehensive approach during the CalWORKs intake process to identify immediate service needs more quickly, the WTW staff can assist participants in removing barriers and curing WTW sanctions. In order to minimize sanctions, the CWD will provide additional flexibilities which may include engaging participants on a lower level of engagement with a higher level of support eventually leading to a higher level of engagement with a lower level of support, as appropriate. References: Vu, C.M., Anthony, E.K., & Austin, M.J. Strategies for engaging adults in Welfare-to- Work activities. Antipoverty Efforts for Vulnerable Families (2009). Retrieved 23 August 2023. https://mackcenter.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/publications/strategies_for_engaging_ adults_in_welfare-to-work_activities.pdf. Goldberg, H. & Schott, L. A compliance-oriented approach to sanctions in state and county TANF programs (2000). Retrieved 25 August 2023. https://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/archive/10-1-00sliip.htm. 4. Describe the roles of each partner and collaborator in implementing the selected strategies. The role of internal and external partners and collaborators was instrumental in helping the CWD identify gaps and develop strategies to address our Sanction Rate. This 13 included identifying a need to better educate our participants about the WTW program, barrier removal services, and available supportive services such as Stage 1 Childcare, transportation, ancillary services, educational support, and technology support. This education extends to WTW activities in the community with contracted partners to extend the message of available supportive services and benefits to curing a WTW sanction. The CWD will continue to utilize partner and collaborator feedback for process improvement and program implementation. 5. Identify any staff education and training needs, and include any technical assistance needed to implement strategy and achieve goal. Additional WTW training will be included in the CalWORKs curriculum to ensure the policy and business process is clear and understood. This will include enhanced education about the WTW program overall, benefits of participating, and available support when engaged in WTW. Additionally, we will continue to invite our community partners to various internal trainings to educate our staff on available activities. 6. Describe how the CWD plans to mitigate and/or address both known internal and external barriers to achieve this goal. The CWD will redirect current staff and resources to focus on the importance of curing WTW sanctions, providing additional support when participants cannot engage in WTW prior to initiating non-compliance and sanction, and connecting regularly with our WTW population to ensure information about the program is clear and concise. We continu e to meet regularly with our external contracted and non-contracted partners to support activities available for participants to ensure a myriad of activity options are available for engagement. Additionally, the Policy & Planning unit will continue to review Cal-OAR disaggregate data to identify if any subpopulations have been more greatly impacted by WTW sanctions and will work with the Cal-OAR team to identify strategies to address these issues, if any. 7. Describe how your facility will continuously evaluate each action step taken to see if improvement is being achieved. (e.g., tracking tools, meetings, monitoring, etc.) Include who will be responsible for follow up and compliance. The Cal-OAR team, Operations staff, Policy & Planning unit, and Senior Management team will meet regularly to review the CWDs progress of decreasing the WTW Sanction Rate. They will utilize reports available in CalSAWS as well as ad-hoc reports. The Executive Management team will review reports and performance monthly. 14 Goal 3: Increase First Activity Attendance Rate to 64% from 62%. Review using Cal- OAR dashboard and county reports increasing 0.5% every 6 months within 2 years (for a total of a 2% improvement). • Strategy 1: Increase outreach to educate participants about scheduled appointments with their WTW worker and activity attendance. • Strategy 2: Provide more upfront transportation and other supportive services to support participant activity engagement. • Strategy 3: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to first activity attendance. 1. Explain the reasoning or methodology which was used to determine this goal. The First Activity Attendance Rate was identified as a challenge in this review period which occurred during the pandemic. Participants were given good cause from participating in WTW due to employment barriers and resource limitations during the pandemic which resulted in fewer participants engaging in WTW and overall WTW engagement in first activities after signing the WTW Plan. Additionally, employment and other activities with employers and community-based organizations were reduced or eliminated during this review period; therefore, the CWD was limited in the ability to refer participants to activities which directly impacted this performance measure. 2. What led the CWD to these improvement strategies? Through operational reports and Cal-OAR data, the CWD identified reduced activity engagement throughout this review period which has led the CWD to strive to increase participation and support for WTW customers seeking employment, attending school, and barrier removal services. Throughout the pandemic, the CWD recognized the importance of offering in-person and virtual activities including online education opportunities, a range of employment opportunities, and Community Based Organizations (CBOs) who provide different methods to access barrier removal services. As the post pandemic period continues to unfold, the CWD can strengthen re - engagement efforts to connect participants to the most appropriate activity based on the participant's personal and family goals. Additionally, the CWD will provide training to refresh staff on re-engagement and activity retention strategies. 3. Discuss any research or literature that supports the strategies chosen. Cite reference(s), if applicable. The CWD will continue to identify and develop training that supports WTW staff with participant re-engagement. Through the CalWORKs 2.0 model, staff will work more closely with participants to identify their individual personal and family goals to best connect them to resources and activities to achieve these goals. As participants engage in activities, the WTW worker will strengthen follow-up strategies, ensuring participants are meeting their goals and quickly pivoting when necessary to new or different 15 employment or educational activities. The State Support Network (SSN) and International City/County Management Association (ICMA) describes the importance and necessity of identifying specific goals within the family and individual adult to support re-engagement and continual attendance in educational and employment activities, particularly when adults are facing a variety of barriers. The CWD will make efforts to focus on identifying and assisting the participant in accessing barrier removal services which will support the individual and family in achieving their overall goals and reaching various levels of personal and professional success. References: DiGiovanna, P.B. (2021 September 1). Engaging marginalized communities: challenges and best practices. Retrieved August 23, 2023. https://icma.org/articles/pm - magazine/engaging-marginalized-communities-challenges-and-best-practices Jacques, C. & Villegas, A. (2018 December). Strategies for equitable family engagement. Retrieved August 24, 2023. https://oese.ed.gov/files/2020/10/equitable_family_engag_508.pdf 4. Describe the roles of each partner and collaborator in implementing the selected strategies. Throughout the pandemic and post-pandemic period, the CWD has continued to meet with community and internal partners to discuss strategies to enhance activities and barrier removal services to include in-person and virtual options. A variety of options were developed and put into place as well as expanding available technological support for participants to assist them in accessing services and activities. The CWD continues to meet with community and internal partners to evaluate the success of these effort s and determine if additional changes are necessary. 5. Identify any staff education and training needs, and include any technical assistance needed to implement strategy and achieve goal. The WTW staff will receive training to further develop re-engagement strategies and reinforce CalWORKs 2.0 strategies. The Cal-OAR team will continue to invite our community partners to various internal staff trainings to share resources and activities that are available for participants. Through regular monitoring with operational reports and Cal-OAR data, the Operational staff, Cal-OAR team, and Policy & Planning unit will evaluate the success of activity re-engagement and first activity attendance. 6. Describe how the CWD plans to mitigate and/or address both known internal and external barriers to achieve this goal. The Policy & Planning unit will continue to review Cal-OAR disaggregate data to identify if any subpopulations have less access to activities or barrier removal services and provide immediate feedback for the Cal-OAR team and Operational managers to expand access within the community. The CWD will continue to meet with community partners to explore additional resources and ways to enhance access for participants 16 throughout the county. 7. Describe how your facility will continuously evaluate each action step taken to see if improvement is being achieved. (e.g., tracking tools, meetings, monitoring, etc.) Include who will be responsible for follow up and compliance. The Cal-OAR team, Operations staff, Policy & Planning unit, and Senior Management team will meet regularly to review the CWDs progress of increasing the First Activity Attendance Rate. They will utilize reports available in CalSAWS as well as ad-hoc reports. The Executive Management team will review reports and performance monthly. 17 Section 2: Peer Review Peer county/ counties selected for collaboration and consultation: Yolo 1. Discuss how the Peer Review process impact Cal-SIP development. The purpose of the Peer Review process is to partner with a county or counties who are thriving in performance measures where we are aiming to improve, in addition to counties sharing best and most promising practices and techniques to improve mutual performance measures included in the Cal-SIP. We decided to limit our Peer Review County partnership to one county, Yolo County, to allow us ample time to focus on Cal- SIP development. The feedback and recommendations gained through the Peer Review process validated and complemented our existing Cal-SIP strategies and some of our action steps developed during the Cal-SIP planning stage. For example, one of our strategies for improving our OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate is to explore implementation of the CalSAWS auto-case assignment function. We learned through this process that Yolo County has seen improvement in their OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness through the implementation of the CalSAWS auto -case assignment functionality. Overall, the Peer Review component was very helpful. 2. Discuss steps taken to conduct peer review. We partnered with Yolo County for the Peer Review component of the Cal-SIP due to us sharing similar characteristics, such as using the same case management system, having the same Cal-OAR Team structure, and using a caseload-based worker model. Some of the steps taken for the Peer Review included the CWD Cal-OAR Team conducting frequent internal planning meetings to review the Peer Review Toolkit and discuss use of the tools provided. The counties met weekly as both "host" and "peer" counties to review the Cal-SIP documents, discuss the selected performance measures, measure and goal narratives, and goal summaries. Both counties provided support and feedback on the areas reviewed, insight, and ideas for improvement and best practices. 3. Briefly summarize observations and action items from Peer Review process. The CWD's peer review partner provided direct feedback for targeted improvement in the three goal areas of OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate, Sanction Rate, and First Activity Attendance Rate. Through this review process, the peer review county identified a CalSAWS business process that automates referrals to WTW workers that we may implement which will directly positively impact the OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate, Sanction Rate, and First Activity Attendance Rate. The peer review county also asked targeted questions which helped us develop our Cal -SIP and outline our goals and summaries more clearly. For example, Yolo County recommended we elaborate on our training plans regarding social media. 18 The knowledge and feedback from the peer review county provided a different perspective for our Cal-OAR team to assist in setting Cal-SIP goals and business processes. 19 Section 3: Target Measure Summary Goal 1: Increase OCAT/ Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate to 21% from 17%. Review using Cal-OAR dashboard and county reports improving by 1.0% every 6 months within 2 years (for a total of a 4.0% improvement). Performance Measure: OCAT/ Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate Baseline Result: 17% Cal-SIP Start Time: 02/01/2024 Progress Report #1: 02/21/2025 Progress Report #2: 03/27/2026 Cycle End Date: 06/30/2026 Strategies, Action Steps, and Tracking Improvement: Strategy 1: Improve timeliness of referring eligible participants to WTW upon CalWORKs approval. Action Steps: • Through training and policy issuances, reinforce the requirement to refer CalWORK s approved cases with Stage 1 Childcare to WTW the same day approved and expand requirement to all WTW eligible participants. • Support the operational business process that exempt WTW participants are to be referred to WTW to monitor exemption through ongoing training and policy reminders. • At the initial eligibility determination to add an adult to an ongoing CalWORKs case, the CalWORKs worker will refer the individual to WTW as appropriate. Strategy 2: Schedule participant's WTW OCAT/Appraisal in a timelier manner. Action Steps: • Expand outreach efforts that educate participants about the WTW program, available supportive services, and incentives. During the outreach, staff will offer the customer various options for OCAT/Appraisal appointment times. • Utilize operational reports to monitor WTW referrals and OCAT/Appraisal scheduling dates. • Through training and policy issuances, reiterate the required timeframes for scheduling WTW OCAT/Appraisal upon CalWORKs approval. Strategy 3: Reinforce policy for staff through internal Staff Development training and issuance of policy documents. Action Steps: • Through refresher trainings and policy issuances, remind staff of the operational referral process from CalWORKs to WTW. • Conduct ongoing monitoring to review referral timeliness compliance. • Incorporate WTW policy in CalWORKs training provided by Staff Development. 20 Strategy 4: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to the timely delivery of the OCAT. Action Steps: • Review and analyze disaggregated data provided by CDSS and other available sources to determine if and which subpopulation of the CalWORKs/Welfare to Work program is underserved. • Conduct root cause analysis, including partner and collaborator engagement to determine the root cause of disparities/gaps in the following areas, but not limited to service delivery, policies, and business processes. • Develop strategies and actions steps that aim to close the gaps on disparity findings. • Include strategies, action steps, and any other pertinent information in Progress Report #1 due on 02/21/2025. Tracking: The Cal-OAR team, Operations staff, and Senior Management team will meet regularly to review the CWD's progress of the OCAT/Appraisal Completion Timeliness Rate. They will utilize reports available in CalSAWS as well as ad-hoc reports. The Executive Management team will review reports and performance monthly. Goal 2: Decrease Sanction Rate to 11% from 13%. Review using Cal-OAR dashboard and county reports improving by 0.5% every 6 months within 2 years (for a total of a 2.0% improvement). Performance Measure: Sanction Rate Baseline Result: 13% Cal-SIP Start Time: 02/01/2024 Progress Report #1: 02/21/2025 Progress Report #2: 03/27/2026 Cycle End Date: 06/30/2026 Strategies, Action Steps, and Tracking Improvement: Strategy 1: Cure sanction at time of CalWORKs application. Action Steps: • At CalWORKs Intake and redetermination, WTW staff will coordinate curing the WTW sanction at CalWORKs interview. • The WTW worker and participant will review and complete the WTW curing sanction forms (WTW 29 and WTW 2). • During the curing sanction process, the WTW worker will conduct WTW orientation and OCAT/Appraisal with the participant. • During every CalWORKs intake and redetermination, CalWORKs staff will explain the benefits of participating in WTW, available supportive services, Stage 1 Childcare, etc. • At CalWORKs approval, the assigned CalWORKs worker will cure the WTW 21 sanction and begin aiding previously sanctioned participant. Strategy 2: Provide additional flexibility when participants are unable to engage in WTW activity before initiating WTW sanction. Action Steps: • WTW Workers will be assigned a monthly targeted number of WTW sanctioned participants to contact for WTW re-engagement. • Establish a participant text message campaign to cure sanctions. • Increase participant education regarding WTW supportive services, childcare, support when attending school, etc. • Remind staff through policy issuances to utilize all available resources for sanctioned participants. • Reinstate home visits/outreach by Employment Services Worker/Social Worker for WTW participants to assist in curing sanctions. Strategy 3: Reinforce policy for staff through internal Staff Development training and issuance of policy documents. Action Steps: • Provide staff training to reinforce strategies on re-engagement and the WTW curing sanction process. • Publish All Staff communications, other materials, and videos to educate staff. Strategy 4: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to sanctioning WTW participants. Action Steps: • Review and analyze disaggregated data provided by CDSS and other available sources to determine if and which subpopulation of the CalWORKs/Welfare to Work program is sanctioned at a higher rate compared to overall. • Conduct root cause analysis, including partner and collaborator engagement to determine the root cause of disparities/gaps in the following areas, but not limited to service delivery, policies, and business processes. • Develop strategies and actions steps that aim to close the gaps on disparity findings. • Include strategies, action steps, and any other pertinent information in Progress Report #1 due on 02/21/2025. Tracking: The Cal-OAR team, Operations staff, and Senior Management team will meet regularly to review the CWD's progress of the Sanction Rate. They will utilize reports available in CalSAWS as well as ad-hoc reports. The Executive Management team will review reports and performance monthly. Goal 3: Increase First Activity Attendance Rate to 64% from 62%. Review using Cal- OAR dashboard and county reports increasing by 0.5% every 6 months within 2 years (for a total of a 2% improvement). 22 Performance Measure: First Activity Attendance Rate Baseline Result: 62% Cal-SIP Start Time: 02/01/2024 Progress Report #1: 02/21/2025 Progress Report #2: 03/27/2026 Cycle End Date: 06/30/2026 Strategies, Action Steps, and Tracking Improvement: Strategy 1: Increase outreach to educate participants about scheduled appointments with their WTW worker and activity attendance. Action Steps: • Establish text messages to remind participants of appointments and start of activities. • Implement a process for staff to conduct a check-in call with participants prior to the start of their activity to answer any questions and remind them of supportive services and childcare. Strategy 2: Provide more upfront transportation & other supportive services to support participant activity engagement. Action Steps: • Upon assignment of case, contact participant by telephone to encourage WTW activity attendance and discuss transportation, Stage 1 Childcare, and other available supportive services. • Ensure participant has necessary resources to select Stage 1 Childcare provider through referrals to our local Resource and Referral Agency. • Increase marketing of available incentives and continue to issue incentives based on activity enrollment and participation. Strategy 3: Evaluate subpopulation data to identify disparities and/or gaps as it relates to first activity attendance. Action Steps: • Review and analyze disaggregated data provided by CDSS and other available sources to determine if and which subpopulation of the CalWORKs/Welfare to Work program is underserved. • Conduct root cause analysis, including partner and collaborator engagement to determine the root cause of disparities/gaps in the following areas, but not limited to service delivery, policies, and business processes. • Develop strategies and actions steps that aim to close the gaps on disparity findings. • Include strategies, action steps, and any other pertinent information in Progress Report #1 due on 02/21/2025. 23 Tracking: The Cal-OAR team, Operations staff, Policy & Planning unit, and Senior Management team will meet regularly to review the CWDs progress of increasing the First Activity Attendance Rate. They will utilize reports available in CalSAWS as well as ad-hoc reports. The Executive Management team will review reports and performance monthly. □ □ □ Sign, scan, and submit the Signature Sheet along with the Cal-OAR Report to your county's SFT site. For submittal of: Cal-CSA Cal-SIP Cal-SIP Progress Report County Submission Date Cal-CQI Cycle 2021-2026 Cycle County Welfare Director Name Signature Phone Number Board of Supervisors (BOS) Representative Signature – For Cal-SIP Approval Only BOS Approval Date Name Title/Position Signature Contact Information County Cal-OAR Contact Name and Title Phone & E-mail CAL-OAR REPORT SIGNATURE SHEET 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-62 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:12/28/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-62 to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a revenue amendment with the California Department of Community Services and Development to increase the payment limit by $9,455 to an amount not to exceed $945,470 for Community Services Block Grant program services with no change to the period January 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024. (100% Federal) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:2023-2024 Community Services Block Grant Revenue Agreement 23F-4007 Amendment2. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT a resolution to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an amendment to a revenue agreement with the California Department of Community Services and Development, (CSD) to increase funding by $9,455 for a total amount not to exceed $945,470 for Community Services Block Grant program services for the period January 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: $9,455: 100% federal funding from the California Department of Community Services and Development, all of which is budgeted in FY 23-24. There is no County match requirement. BACKGROUND: As the County's Community Action Agency, the Department's Community Services Bureau regularly receives Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) funding to operate self-sufficiency programs under the advisement of the County's Economic Opportunity Council. The self-sufficiency programs have the goal of ameliorating poverty in Contra Costa County through programs that address housing, food security, mental health access, employment, and economic development. Examples of programs to receive funding include those that provide housing payment assistance, food distribution, wrap-around health and mental health services, and employment training. On February 28, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved CSD’s allocation of $927,194 from CSD for the 2023-2024 program year, (C.52). On August 8, 2023, (C.20), the Board accepted an amendment increasing CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-62,Version:1 CSD's allocation by $8,821 for an amount not to exceed $936,015. This Staff Report is to accept an additional allocation of $9,455, increasing the payment limit to an amount not to exceed $945,470 for the 2023-2024 program year. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The County will not receive the additional allocation from CSD. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: The Community Services Bureau of the EHSD's Head Start program supports two (2) of Contra Costa County's community outcomes. Outcome 3: Families that are Economically Self-sufficient. Outcome 4: Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing. These outcomes are achieved by offering partnerships with Community Based Organizations that include high quality services in nutrition, legal consultation, and health services to low-income children and families throughout Contra Costa County. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF: Amendment to 2023-2024 Community Service Block Grant Revenue Agreement 23F- 4007. WHEREAS, On February 28, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved CSD’s allocation of $927,194 from CSD for the 2023-2024 program year (C.52) and on August 8, 2023, (C.20), the Board accepted an amendment increasing CSD's allocation by $8,821 for an amount not to exceed $936,015, and WHEREAS, this Staff Report is to accept an additional allocation of $9,455, increasing the payment limit to an amount not to exceed $945,470 for the 2023-2024 program year, and WHEREAS, the County's Community Action Agency, housed in EHSD, regularly receives Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) funding to operate self-sufficiency programs under the advisement of the County's Economic Opportunity Council, and WHEREAS, the self-sufficiency programs have the goal of ameliorating poverty in Contra Costa County through programs that address housing, food security, mental health access, employment, and economic development, and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-62,Version:1 WHEREAS, examples of programs to receive funding include those that provide housing payment assistance, food distribution, wrap-around health and mental health services, and employment training. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a revenue agreement amendment with the California Department of Community Services and Development to increase funding by $9,455 for an amount not to exceed $945,470 for Community Services Block Grant program services for period January 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-63 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-63 to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with the California Department of Community Services and Development to decrease the payment limit by $59,000 to a new payment limit of $317,446 and to extend the term through March 31, 2024 to administer the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program. (100% Federal, no County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:2021 Low Income Household Water Assistance Program Amendment 2 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT a resolution to approve and authorize the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute Amendment 2 with the California Department of Community Services and Development to extend the term from December 31, 2023 to March 31, 2024, and to decrease the payment limit by $59,000 to a new payment limit of $317,446 to administer the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program. FISCAL IMPACT: $317,446 is 100% Federal Funds through the California Department of Community Services and Development. State Agreement Number: 21W-9002 (Amendment #2) No County Match CFDA# 93.499 County revenue agreement #39-977-2 BACKGROUND: On November 13, 2023, Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) received an CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-63,Version:1 amendment (Amendment 2) from the California Department of Community Services and Development (CSD) to extend the period for the administration of the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program (LIHWAP) program., with a change in the funding amount. This action is to amend the agreement to extend the administration term date from December 31, 2023 to March 31, 2024, with a change in administration amount from $376,446 to $317,446. On May 28, 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released funding to implement the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program (LIHWAP). EHSD received the LIHWAP agreement on April 11, 2022 to administer the water bill assistance payments to eligible county residents who are struggling to make water, wastewater, and/or stormwater payments prior to, and during, the COVID-19 pandemic. The Board of Supervisors approved the agreement on June 7, 2022 (C.53). This Board approved Amendment 1 of the agreement on November 7, 2023 (C.27), to extend the end date from August 31, 2023 to December 31, 2023. As referenced in the Standard Agreement with CSD, Water Assistance Allocation will be held by CSD for the purpose of issuing payment of household LIHWAP assistance to water service providers through CSD’s third-party funds disbursement partner. Contra Costa County’s new allocation for water assistance is $1,808,994 and $317,446 for program administration. Since the last extension, Contra Costa County transferred $59,000 from program administration to water assistance and received an additional $136,651 from California Department of Community Services and Development in water assistance. As of November 13, 2023, a total of 1,713 clients received LIHWAP benefits with an average payment amount of $927. EHSD has fully expended 95% of the benefit funding and the remaining 5% to be spent by the end of the contract period. CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT: The LIHWAP funding supports one of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card, #4 "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing" by the provision of water assistance to keep households with running water. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the County may not be able to claim the final administrative funding to operate LIHWAP. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-63,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF 2021 Low Income Household Water Assistance Program Amendment 2 WHEREAS,On November 13, 2023, Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) received an amendment from the California Department of Community Services and Development (CSD) to extend the period for the administration of the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program (LIHWAP) program, with a change in the funding amount, and WHEREAS,this action is to amend the agreement to extend the administration term date from December 31, 2023, to March 31, 2024, with a change in administration amount from $376,446 to $317,446, and WHEREAS,on May 28, 2021,the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released funding to implement the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program (LIHWAP). EHSD received the LIHWAP agreement on April 11, 2022, to administer the water bill assistance payments to eligible county residents who are struggling to make water, wastewater, and/or stormwater payments prior to, and during, the COVID-19 pandemic, and WHEREAS,the Board of Supervisors approved the agreement on June 7, 2022 (C.53), and WHEREAS, t his Board approved Amendment 1 of the agreement on November 7, 2023, to extend the end date from August 31, 2023 to December 31, 2024 (C.27), and WHEREAS,as referenced in the Standard Agreement with CSD, Water Assistance Allocation will be held by CSD for the purpose of issuing payment of household LIHWAP assistance to water service providers through CSD’s third-party funds disbursement partner, and WHEREAS, Contra Costa County’s new allocation for water assistance is $1,808,994 and $317,446 for program administration, and WHEREAS,since the last extension, Contra Costa County transferred $59,000 from program administration to water assistance and received an additional $136,651 from California Department of Community Services and Development in water assistance, and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-63,Version:1 WHEREAS,as of November 13, 2023, a total of 1,713 clients received LIHWAP benefits with an average payment amount of $927, and WHEREAS,EHSD has fully expended 95% of the benefit funding and the remaining 5% to be spent by the end of the contract period. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ADOPT Resolution for the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute Amendment 2 with the California Department of Community Services and Development to extend the term from December 31, 2023 to March 31, 2024,and to decrease the payment limit by $59,000 to a new payment limit of $317,446 to administer the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0527 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RATIFY the Employment and Human Services Department’s grant application; and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept funding if awarded up to $4,000,000 from the Displaced Oil and Gas Workers Fund, and execute a revenue agreement, and any extensions or amendments thereof, with the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency for the period July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027. (100% State, no County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director Report Title:Displaced Oil and Gas Workers Fund Revenue Application ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RATIFY the Employment and Human Services Department’s grant application; and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to accept funding if awarded up to $4,000,000 from the Displaced Oil and Gas Workers Fund (DOGWF), and execute a revenue agreement, and any extensions or amendments thereof, with the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency for the period July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: If awarded, revenue up to $4,000,000 (100% State funds), $1,333,333 of which will be budgeted in FY2024- 2025; $1,333,333 of which will be budgeted in FY 2025-2026; and $1,333,333 of which will be budgeted in FY 2026-2027. No County Match Required. BACKGROUND: On November 14, 2023, Contra Costa Employment and Human Services Department applied for a Displaced Oil and Gas Workers Fund grant from the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency. The DOGWF program supports leading initiatives that align with the objectives of assisting workers affected by the transition away from the oil and gas industry. The primary focus of the grant is to guide these workers into high -quality careers. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0527,Version:1 CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT: The services provided for this funding support three community outcomes established in the Children’s Report Card: (3) “Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient”; (4) “Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing”; and (5) “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families” by providing training and employment opportunities to families impacted by the transition away from the oil and gas industry. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without approval to apply for these funds, participants and employers will not have access to industry driven job trainings or skill upgrading that lead to self-sufficiency, adversely impacting participants ability to self- sustain within the community; and local businesses will have fewer qualified candidates for positions. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0528 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/22/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with 1125 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Operating Company, LLC (dba Kentfield Hospital), in an amount not to exceed $9,300,000 to provide long term acute care services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-035-5 with 1125 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Operating Company, LLC (dba Kentfield Hospital) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-035-5 with 1125 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Operating Company,LLC (dba Kentfield Hospital), a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $9,300,000,to provide long term acute care (LTAC) services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients for the period from February l, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $9,300,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized LTAC services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing LTAC services including,but not limited to:nursing,respiratory and nutritional therapies,pain management,case management,social services,end of life care services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since September 2016.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations. This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0528,Version:1 This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience. Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.The nature of the LTAC services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination,integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of 5 LTAC providers in CCHP’s service area.CCHP is currently contracted with 4 of the agencies.This Contract renewal will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on December 12, 2023. On March 23,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-035-4 with Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Operating Company,LLC (dba Kentfield Hospital),in an amount not to exceed $7,500,000,for the provision of LTAC services for CCHP members and county recipients for the period February 1,2021 through January 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-035-5 will allow the contractor to continue to provide LTAC services for CCHP members and county recipients through January 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain specialized long term acute care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided by this contractor and service may be delayed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0529 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/23/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Leica Microsystems Inc., effective February 27, 2024, to decrease the minimum monthly purchase commitment required under the Instrument Acquisition Agreement for reagent supplies, support and maintenance for tissue sample equipment at the Clinical Laboratory at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center with no change in the payment limit or term ending January 3, 2028. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #23-787-1 with Leica Microsystems Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment #23-787-1 with Leica Microsystems Inc.,a corporation,effective February 27,2024,to amend Contract #23-787,to decrease the minimum monthly purchase commitment required under the Instrument Acquisition Agreement and continue to provide reagent supplies,support and maintenance for tissue sample equipment for the Clinical Laboratory at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC),with no change in the original payment limit of $596,174 or term January 4, 2023 through January 3, 2028. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will not result in additional annual expenditures and will be funded as budgeted by the department, 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: This contract amendment meets the needs of the county by reducing the minimum monthly purchase commitment requirement of the agreement.The Leica Bond Max staining system and associated tissue processor (ASP6025)utilized by the Clinical Laboratory at CCRMC provide an advanced magnetic stirrer technology that optimizes paraffin infiltration and enhances reagent exchange with the tissue cells and cassette printer, minimizing specimen misidentification. On March 7,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-787,with Leica Microsystems Inc.,an Instrument Acquisition Agreement,in an amount not to exceed $596,174 for the purchase of tissue sample equipment (Bond Max and Tissue Processor ASP6025)and reagent product and supplies for the Clinical CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0529,Version:1 equipment (Bond Max and Tissue Processor ASP6025)and reagent product and supplies for the Clinical Laboratory at CCRMC for the period from January 4,2023,through January 3,2028.After executing Contract #23-787,CCRMC began utilizing various other Lecia equipment,which resulted in a reduction in the products used (for the Bond Max)and the minimum monthly purchase commitment requirements of the agreement not being met.As such,the parties have agreed to execute Contract Amendment #23-787-1,amending the Instrument Acquisition Agreement to lower the Purchase Commitment. Approval of Contract Amendment #23-787-1 will allow the contractor to continue to provide services through January 3, 2028. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved,CCRMC can't trade in its existing test equipment that does not allow for rapid testing once a current batch of samples is loaded,creating several workflow challenges and bottlenecks in patient and employee testing. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0530 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/23/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute an amendment with Roche Diagnostics Corporation, effective February 27, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $1,046,875 to an amount not to exceed $2,577,300 and extend the term through December 31, 2032, for additional equipment, services, reagents and supplies to provide processing services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #76-752-1 with Roche Diagnostics Corporation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment #76-752-1 with Roche Diagnostics Corporation,a corporation,effective February 27, 2024,to amend Contract #76-752,to increase the payment limit by $1,046,875,from $1,530,425 to a new payment limit of $2,577,300,and to extend the termination date from August 10,2026 to December 31,2032, for the purchase of a cobas5800 analyzer used for patient specimen testing,including supplies,software,and service, for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Contra Costa Health Centers. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional annual expenditures of up to $1,046,875 and will be funded as budgeted by the department, by 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: This contract amendment meets the needs of CCRMC and its health centers,allowing the trade-in of its existing Roche cobas6800 System for the Roche cobas5800 System,aiding in the automation,integration, consolidation,and standardization of high-volume and molecular testing such as Covid-19 and influenza and allows in-house testing.The Roche cobas5800 System includes ancillary test equipment,reagents,and supplies for CCRMC clinical laboratories and pathology to process, test, and analyze patient specimens. CCRMC has been using Roche products since 2010.On December 21,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-752 with Roche Diagnostics Corporation,in the amount not to exceed $1,530,425,for the purchase of a Roche cobas6800 fully automated patient specimen testing system for the period August 11, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0530,Version:1 2021, through August 10, 2026. Under this contract amendment,CCRMC will trade in the cobas6800 (purchased under the Roche Diagnostics Corporation Master Agreement County Contract #76-752)and upgrade its current testing platform to the cobas5800 analyzer,which includes specifications required by the Centers for Medicare &Medicaid Services to meet Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments and Federal Drug Administration accreditation requirements.The cobas5800 offers a compact,fully automated molecular system that aids in high demands and streamlines the process to a single platform,including preventative maintenance,real-time support,and on- site service. Approval of Contract Amendment #76-752-1 allows the contractor to provide services through December 31, 2032. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, CCRMC can't trade in its existing test equipment that does not allow for rapid testing once a current batch of samples is loaded, creating several workflow challenges and bottlenecks in patient and employee testing. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0531 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/24/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Jigsaw Diagnostics, A Professional Psychology Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $400,000 to provide Behavioral Health Treatment - Comprehensive Diagnostic Evaluation services for Contra Costa Health Plan members for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract # 77-490-1 with Jigsaw Diagnostics, A Professional Psychology Corporation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County, Contract #77-490-1 with Jigsaw Diagnostics,A Professional Psychology Corporation,in an amount not to exceed $400,000,to provide Behavioral Health Treatment (BHT)-Comprehensive Diagnostic Evaluations (CDE)services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients,for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $400,000 over a two-year period and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund II revenues. BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized BHT-CDE services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor will cooperate with and participate in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience. Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs. The nature of the BHT-CDE services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination,integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There are a total of 14 providers in CCHP’s service area. CCHP is currently contracted with 10 BHT-CDE agencies.This contract renewal will maintain comprehensiveCONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0531,Version:1 CCHP is currently contracted with 10 BHT-CDE agencies.This contract renewal will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on November 29, 2023 Under new Contract #77-490-1,this contractor will provide BHT-CDE services for CCHP members with a term of February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain specialized BHT-CDE services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contract with the county will not be provided and services may be delayed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0532 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/24/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Sunrise ABA LLC, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide Behavioral Health Treatment- Applied Behavioral Analysis services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-439-1 with Sunrise ABA LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-439-1 with Sunrise ABA LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $300,000, to provide Behavioral Health Treatment (BHT)-Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA)services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $300,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized BHT-ABA health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.These services include but are not limited to:functional assessments,initial plan development,skills training,therapeutic direct services,reassessments,case management services and home care training with families.Sunrise ABA LLC’s proven track record and established reputation within the medical community mitigates potential risks associated with CCHP’s success and patient well-being.This contractor has been part of the CCHP Provider Network providing BHT-ABA services since February 1, 2022. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performanceCONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0532,Version:1 and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.The nature of the BHT-ABA services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination, integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There are a total of 64 BHT-ABA providers in CCHP’s service area.CCHP is currently contracted with 59 BHT-ABA agencies.This contract will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)services. This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on October 25, 2023. In March 2022,the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #77-439 with Sunrise ABA LLC,in an amount not to exceed $200,000,for the provision of BHT-ABA services for CCHP members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2022 through January 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-439-1 will allow the contractor to continue to provide BHT-ABA services for CCHP members and county recipients through January 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved certain specialized BHT-ABA services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0533 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Portia Bell Hume Behavioral Health and Training Center, for provision of additional Mental Health Services Act Full Service Partnership Services to non-Medi-Cal adults with serious mental illness who are homeless or at serious risk of homelessness with no change in the payment limit or term ending June 30, 2024. (100% Mental Health Services Act) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #24-717-12 with Portia Bell Hume Behavioral Health and Training Center ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of County Contract Amendment Agreement #24-717-12 with Portia Bell Hume Behavioral Health and Training Center,a non-profit corporation,effective July 1,2023,to amend Contract #24-717-11,to provide additional Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)Full Service Partnership (FSP)Services to non-Medi-Cal adults with serious mental illness who are homeless or at serious risk of homelessness,with no change in the original payment limit of $2,745,778, and no change in the original term of July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in no change to the original budgeted expenditures of up to $2,745,778 and is funded 100% by Mental Health Services Act. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of County’s population by providing a FSP Program funded by the MHSA, providing a comprehensive range of services and supports in West,Central and East Contra Costa County including case management,mental health services,medication support,and crisis intervention to non-Medi- Cal adults with serious mental illness who are homeless or at serious risk of homelessness.This contractor has been providing MHSA FSP services to the county since March 2014. On December 12,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #24-717-11 with Portia Bell Hume Behavioral Health and Training Center,in an amount not to exceed $2,745,778,for the provision of MHSA FSP Program services to adults with serious mental illness who are homeless or at serious risk of homelessness for the period from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0533,Version:1 Approval of Amendment #24-717-12 will allow contractor to provide additional MHSA FSP Program services, including outreach and engagement,intake evaluation and consultation services through June 30,2024.The original contract did not include all the services the contractor was providing,an audit of these services was done after contract was completed, causing a delay in processing of this amendment. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved,mentally ill adults who are homeless will not have access to all the contractor’s mental health services,leading to reduced levels of service to the community and potential placement in higher levels of care. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0534 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/26/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Vibrantcare Outpatient Rehabilitation of California, in an amount not to exceed $2,700,000 to provide physical therapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-065-3 with Vibrantcare Outpatient Rehabilitation of California ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-065-3 with Vibrantcare Outpatient Rehabilitation of California,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $2,700,000,to provide physical therapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $2,700,000 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain physical therapy services to its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing these services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since March 1,2017.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this Contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on January 10, 2024. On March 2,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-065-2 with with Vibrantcare Outpatient CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0534,Version:1 On March 2,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-065-2 with with Vibrantcare Outpatient Rehabilitation of California,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $1,650,000,for the provision of physical therapy services for CCHP members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-065-3 will allow the contractor to continue providing physical therapy services to CCHP members and county recipients through February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain physical therapy services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0535 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/29/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Hilltop Radiology, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000 to provide diagnostic imaging services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and County recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #27-687-9 with Hilltop Radiology, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-687-9 with Hilltop Radiology,LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000,to provide diagnostic imaging services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $3,000,000 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain diagnostic imaging services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing these services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since March 1,2007.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs. The nature of the diagnostic imaging services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination, integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of 18 providers in CCHP’s CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0535,Version:1 integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of 18 providers in CCHP’s service area.CCHP is currently contracted with 7 diagnostic imaging providers.This contract renewal will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on January 9, 2024. On March 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-687-8 with Hilltop Radiology,LLC,in an amount not to exceed $1,050,000,for the provision of diagnostic imaging services for CCHP members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. Approval of Contract #27-687-9 will allow the contractor to continue providing diagnostic imaging services to CCHP members and county recipients through February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain diagnostic imaging services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0536 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/29/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with National Eye Care, Inc., effective March 31, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $95,000 to a new payment limit of $285,000 and extend the term through June 30, 2025 to provide additional optometry services at Martinez Detention Facility. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract Amendment/Extension Agreement #76-604-4 with National Eye Care, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment/Extension Agreement #76-604-4 with National Eye Care, Inc., a corporation, effective March 31, 2024, to amend Contract #76-604-2 (as amended by Amendment Agreement #76-604-3), to increase the payment limit by $95,000, from $190,000 to a new payment limit of $285,000 and extend the term end date from March 31, 2024 to June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Amendment/Extension Agreement will result in additional expenditures of up to $95,000 and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: Optometry Services are needed for inmates who are incarcerated at three (3) adult detention facilities in Contra Costa County. Services include eye care, eye exams, and eyeglasses. Title 16 regulations require timely access to essential health care for incarcerated inmates. Historically, optometry services have been difficult to obtain for inmates. This contract allows County to safely tend to the medical needs of inmates on-site. County has been contracting with National Eye Care, Inc. since April 1, 2022 to provide optometry services to inmates incarcerated at 3 detention facilities in Contra Costa Couty and perform these services at the Martinez Detention Facility. In April 2022, the County Administrator approved and Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #76- 604-2 with National Eye Care, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $45,000 for the provision of optometry services including eye exams and eyeglasses for inmate/patient population at Martinez Detention Facility for the period CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0536,Version:1 April 1, 2022 through March 31, 2024. In July 2023, the County Administrator approved and Purchasing Services Manager executed Amendment Agreement #76-604-3 with National Eye Care, Inc., effective December 1, 2022, to increase the payment limit by $145,000 to a new payment limit of $190,000 with no change in the term for additional optometry services. Approval of Amendment/Extension Agreement #76-604-4 will allow the contractor to provide additional optometry services through June 30, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, inmates will not have access to optometry services further putting their health at risk. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0537 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/30/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with George Lee, M.D., effective March 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $520,000 to an amount not to exceed $2,680,000 to provide additional anesthesiology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers with no change in the term ending May 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment Agreement #26-995-23 with George Lee, M.D. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #26-995-23 with George Lee,M.D.,an individual,effective March 1,2024,to amend Contract #26-995-21 (as amended by Amendment Agreement #26-995-22),to increase the payment limit by $520,000,from $2,160,000 to a new payment limit of $2,680,000,with no change in the original term of June 1, 2022 through May 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional contractual service expenditures of up to $520,000 and will be funded as budgeted 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: Due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community,Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC)and Contra Costa Health Centers relies on contracts to provide necessary specialty health services to its patients.CCRMC has contracted with George Lee,M.D.,for anesthesiology services since August 12, 2002. On June 21,2022,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-995-21 with George Lee,M.D.,in an amount not to exceed $1,850,000 to provide anesthesiology services at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period June 1, 2022 through May 31, 2025. On June 13,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment Agreement #26-995-22 with George Lee, M.D.,effective May 1,2023,to increase the payment limit by $310,000,from $1,850,000 to a new payment CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0537,Version:1 M.D.,effective May 1,2023,to increase the payment limit by $310,000,from $1,850,000 to a new payment limit of $2,160,000,to provide additional anesthesiology services at CCRMC and Health Centers with no change in the term of June 1, 2022 through May 31, 2025. Approval of Amendment Agreement #26-995-23 will allow the contractor to provide additional anesthesiology services through May 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved,the necessary specialty anesthesiology services needed for patient care will not be available or will create increased wait times due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0538 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/30/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Peyman Keyashian, M.D., effective March 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $380,000 to an amount not exceed $2,660,000, to provide additional anesthesiology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers with no change in the term ending May 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #26-788-15 with Peyman Keyashian, M.D. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #26-788-15 with Peyman Keyashian,M.D.,an individual,effective March 1, 2024,to amend Contract #26-788-13 (as amended by Amendment Agreement #26-788-14),to increase the payment limit by $380,000,from $2,280,000 to a new payment limit of $2,660,000,with no change in the term of June 1, 2022 through May 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional contractual service expenditures of up to $380,000 and will be funded as budgeted 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No Rate increase) BACKGROUND: Due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community,CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers relies on contractors to provide necessary specialty health services to its patients.Contractor’s anesthesiology services will include clinic coverage,consultation,training,on-call and medical procedures. Contractor has been providing anesthesiology services to county since January 2015. On June 21,2022,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-788-13 with Peyman Keyashian,M.D.,in an amount not to exceed $2,100,000 to provide anesthesiology services at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers including consultation,on-call and clinic coverage,for the period from June 1,2022 through May 31, 2025. On June 13,2023 the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment Agreement #26-788-14 with Payman CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0538,Version:1 On June 13,2023 the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment Agreement #26-788-14 with Payman Keyashian,M.D.,effective May 1,2023,to increase the payment limit by $180,000,from $2,100,000 to a new payment limit of $2,280,000,to provide additional anesthesiology services at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers with no change in the term of June 1, 2022 through May 31, 2025. Approval of Amendment Agreement #26-788-15 will allow the contractor to provide additional anesthesiology services through May 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved,the necessary specialty anesthesiology services needed for patient care will not be available or will create increased wait times due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0615 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/30/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with SHS Consulting, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $302,480 to provide consultation and technical assistance to the Behavioral Health Services Director in regard to information technology and data management for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2025. (100% Mental Health Realignment) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #74-626-5 with SHS Consulting, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #74-626-5 with SHS Consulting,LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $302,480,to provide consultation and technical assistance to the Behavioral Health Services Department (BHSD)Director in regard to information technology and data management for the period February 1,2024 through January 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in budgeted annual expenditures of up to $302,480 and will be funded 100% by Mental Health Realignment. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: The county has been contracting with SHS Consulting,LLC,since February 2021 to provide consultation and technical assistance to the BHSD Director with regard to information technology and data management,to provide reliable interoperability between collaborative healthcare partners by improving accuracy and expedience for the services delivered to county clients.This contractor serves as the primary liaison between BHSD and Health Services Department of Information Technology (IT)for reporting and data systems as required to sustain compliance with the vast regulatory issues imposed on behavioral health services by federal and state laws.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 this contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on December 6, 2023. On December 13,2022,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74-626-3 with SHS Consulting,LLC,in CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0615,Version:1 On December 13,2022,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #74-626-3 with SHS Consulting,LLC,in the amount not to exceed $207,480 for the provision of consulting and technical assistance services to the BHSD Director regarding IT and data management for the period February 1, 2023 through January 31, 2024. On November 28,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment #74-626-4 to increase the payment limit by $95,000 to a new payment limit of $302,480 to allow the contractor to provide additional consulting and technical assistance services through January 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #74-626-5 will allow the contractor to continue providing consultation and technical assistance services through January 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,the Behavioral Health Services Director will not receive the consulting and technical assistance needed for ongoing information technology and data management. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0539 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Yosemite Pathology Medical Group, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 to provide pathology laboratory services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-321-1 with Yosemite Pathology Medical Group, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-321-1 with Yosemite Pathology Medical Group,Inc.,a professional corporation,in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000,to provide pathology laboratory services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)Members and county recipients, for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $1,500,000 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized outside clinical laboratory testing services,including pathology laboratory services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network for several years,formerly under a memorandum of understanding (MOU)with CCHP and was required to convert to a County contract on February 1,2021.This contractor has been providing pathology laboratory services and continuing to foster a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0539,Version:1 Programs. The nature of these clinical laboratory services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination, integration,and collaboration with existing programs,systems,and personnel.Yosemite Pathology Medical Group,Inc.,is familiar with CCHP’s specific requirements to help ensure a smoother implementation and delivery process.There are a total of 14 providers for clinical laboratory services in CCHP ‘s service area. CCHP is currently contracted with 10 clinical laboratories.This Contract renewal will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)Services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on December 6, 2023. On February 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-321 with Yosemite Pathology Medical Group,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $525,000,for the provision of pathology laboratory services for CCHP members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2021 through January 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-321-1 will allow the contractor to continue providing pathology laboratory services through January 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized outside laboratory testing health care services for CCHP members will not be provided and may cause a delay in pathology laboratory services for CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0540 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Guardant Health, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-650 with Guardant Health, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-650 with Guardant Health,Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients,for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $300,000 over a two-year period and will be funded 100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized outside clinical laboratory testing services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor’s proven track record and established reputation within the medical community mitigates potential risks associated with CCHP’s success and patient well-being.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code § 1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience. Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.This is a new contractor who will be part of the CCHP Provider Network providing clinical laboratory testing services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission, values, and long-term objectives starting February 1, 2024. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0540,Version:1 The nature of these clinical laboratory services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination, integration,and collaboration with existing programs,systems,and personnel.Guardant Health is familiar with CCHP’s specific requirements to help ensure a smoother implementation and delivery process.There are a total of 14 providers for clinical laboratory services agencies in CCHP ‘s service area.CCHP is currently contracted with 10 clinical laboratories agencies.This new contract will enhance comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)Services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on November 29, 2023. Under new Contract #77-650 allows the contractor to provide clinical laboratory testing services through January 31, 2026. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized outside laboratory testing health care services for CCHP members will not be provided and may cause a delay in services for CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0541 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with MDxHealth, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-647 with MDxHealth, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-647 with MDxHealth,Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients,for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $300,000 over a two-year period and will be funded 100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized outside clinical laboratory testing services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor’s proven track record and established reputation within the medical community mitigates potential risks associated with CCHP’s success and patient well-being.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code § 1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience. Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.This is a new contractor who will be part of the CCHP Provider Network providing clinical laboratory testing services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission, values, and long-term objectives starting February 1, 2024. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0541,Version:1 The nature of these clinical laboratory services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination, integration,and collaboration with existing programs,systems,and personnel.MDxHealth,Inc.,is familiar with CCHP’s specific requirements to help ensure a smoother implementation and delivery process.There are a total of 14 providers for clinical laboratory services agencies in CCHP ‘s service area.CCHP is currently contracted with 10 clinical laboratories agencies.This new contract will enhance comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)Services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on November 29, 2023. Under new Contract #77-647 allows the contractor to provide clinical laboratory testing services through January 31, 2026. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized outside clinical laboratory testing health care services for CCHP members will not be provided and may cause a delay in laboratory services for CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0542 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Gregg T. Pottorff, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide orthopedic services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #76-853 with Gregg T. Pottorff, M.D. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #76-853 with Gregg T.Pottorff,M.D.,an individual,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,to provide orthopedic services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC)and Contra Costa Health Centers,for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $300,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community,CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers relies on contractors to provide necessary specialty health services to its patients.Gregg T. Pottorff,M.D.is new to CCRMC and will provide orthopedic specialty services including,but not limited to: clinic coverage, consultation, training and medical and surgical procedures starting February 1, 2024. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 CCRMC Physician services are exempt from Solicitation requirements. Under new Contract #76-853 contractor will provide orthopedic services at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0542,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,the necessary specialty orthopedic services needed for patient care will not be available or will create increased wait times due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0543 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to purchase on behalf of the Health Service Director, gift cards totaling an amount not to exceed $10,150 to provide support for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) Medi-Cal members to participate on the CCHP Community Advisory Committee and in focus groups, interviews, surveys, and listening sessions for the period January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. (100% California Department of Health Care Services) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Gift cards for CCHP Advisory Committee Members ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, on behalf of the Health Services Director, to purchase up to 100 Amazon gift cards each with a $50 value totaling $5,000, 50 Walmart gift cards each with a $50 value totaling $2,500 plus $150 shipping, and 50 Target gift cards each with a $50 value totaling $2,500, for a total amount not to exceed $10,150 to provide support for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) Medi-Cal members to participate on the CCHP Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and in focus groups, interviews, surveys, and listening sessions, as required by CCHP’s contract with the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS), for the 2024 calendar year. FISCAL IMPACT: This $10,150 expenditure will be funded by the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS). There is no impact to the County General Fund. BACKGROUND: Beginning with the 2024 contract, DHCS requires all Medi-Cal Managed Care Plans to have a Community Advisory Committee. The CAC’s function is to gather and incorporate member feedback on CCHP’s policies and decision-making. Members of the CAC must reflect the plan’s demographics. Since 97% of CCHP’s members are Medi-Cal recipients, CCHP will provide gift cards to help with CAC membership recruitment and meeting attendance. As part of CCHP’s ongoing operational activities for compliance with the 2024 contract with DHCS, CCHP is recruiting new members of the CAC and have six CAC meetings scheduled for 2024. CCHP will provide gift cards to eligible CAC members for meeting attendance, participating in focus groups, interviews, surveys, and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0543,Version:1 listening sessions, as applicable. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If these purchases are not approved, CCHP will not be able to effectively recruit and retain CAC members in order to fulfill its contractual obligation to DHCS to form a CAC and ensure that CAC members can effectively participate in meetings. This would put CCHP out of compliance with the DHCS contract, and at risk of audit findings by DHCS. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0544 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with BioReference Health, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-444-1 with BioReference Health, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-444 with BioReference Health,LLC (formally known as Bio-Reference Laboratories,Inc.),a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,to provide clinical laboratory testing services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients,for the period February 1,2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $300,000 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized outside clinical laboratory testing services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing clinical laboratory testing services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since February 1,2022.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0544,Version:1 The nature of these clinical laboratory testing services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination, integration,and collaboration with existing programs,systems,and personnel.This contractor is familiar with CCHP’s specific requirements to help ensure a smoother implementation and delivery process.There are a total of 12 providers for clinical laboratory testing services in CCHP ‘s service area.CCHP is currently contracted with all 10 clinical laboratories.This contract renewal will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)Services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on November 13, 2023. In June 2022,the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #77- 444 with Bio-Reference Laboratories,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $80,000,for the provision of clinical laboratories testing services for CCHP members and county recipients for the period February 1,2022 through January 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-444-1 will allow the contractor to continue providing clinical laboratory testing services under their new company name of BioReference Health, LLC, through January 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized outside clinical laboratory testing health care services for CCHP members will not be provided and may cause a delay in laboratory services for CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0545 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Total Anesthesia Care, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,050,000 to provide anesthesiology services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-543-1 with Total Anesthesia Care, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-543-1 with Total Anesthesia Care,Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $1,050,000,to provide anesthesiology services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)Members and county recipients,for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $1,050,000 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain medical specialty services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing anesthesiology services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since March 1,2023.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 the contractor provides physician services for CCHP and is exempt from solicitation requirements. On March 14,2023,the County Administrator approved,and the Purchasing Services Manager executed CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0545,Version:1 On March 14,2023,the County Administrator approved,and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #77-543 with Total Anesthesia Care,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $200,000,for the provision of anesthesia services for CCHP members and county recipients,for the period March 1,2023 through February 29, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-543-1 will allow the contractor to continue providing anesthesiology services to CCHP members and county recipients through February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain anesthesiology services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0546 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Robert Buckley, M.D., effective March 1, 2024, to modify the rate for orthopedic clinic coverage at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers with no change in the payment limit or term ending November 8, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment Agreement #26-774-10 with Robert Buckley, M.D. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #27-774-10 with Robert Buckley,M.D.,an individual,effective March 1, 2024,to amend Contract #26-774-9,to modify the rates to include a reimbursement option for Electronic Health Record (EHR)documented during orthopedic clinic coverage at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC)and Contra Costa Health Centers patients,with no change in the original payment limit of $750,000, and no change in the original term of November 9, 2022 through November 8, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in no change to the budgeted expenditures of up to $750,000 and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: Due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community,CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers relies on contracts to provide necessary specialty health services to its patients.This contractor has been providing orthopedic services,including but not limited to:clinic coverage,consultation,training,and administrative duties in the orthopedic clinic at CCRMC and Health Centers since July 2014.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations in January 2024. On November 8,2022,the Board of Supervisors approved (1)Cancellation Agreement #26-774-8 with Robert Buckley,M.D.,effective at the end of business on November 8,2022;and (2)Contract #26-774-9 with Robert Buckley,M.D.,in an amount not to exceed $750,000,for the provision of orthopedic services at CCRMC and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0546,Version:1 Buckley,M.D.,in an amount not to exceed $750,000,for the provision of orthopedic services at CCRMC and Health Centers, for the period November 9, 2022 through November 8, 2025. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #26-774-10 will allow the contractor to continue to provide orthopedic services and modify the rates to include a payment option for EHR documented during orthopedic clinic, through November 8, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved,contractor would not have the option to be reimbursed for clinic sessions by EHR documented clinic encounter as agreed to by the parties. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0547 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Danny Wu, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $900,000 to provide gastroenterology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #76-855 with Danny Wu, M.D. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of County Contract #76-855 with Danny Wu,M.D.,an individual,in an amount not to exceed $900,000,to provide gastroenterology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC)and Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $900,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community,CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers relies on contractors to provide necessary specialty health services to its patients.This contractor will provide gastroenterology services including,but not limited to:Gastrointestinal clinic services, inpatient consultation,training,medical/surgical procedures and on-call services.CCRMC will begin contracting with Dr.Wu for gastroenterology patient care services starting March 1,2024.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations in December 2023.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3,CCRMC Physician services are exempt from Solicitation requirements. Under new Contract #76-855,contractor will provide gastroenterology services at CCRMC and Contra Costa CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0547,Version:1 Health Centers through February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,the necessary specialty gastroenterology services needed for patient care will not be available or will create increased wait times due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0548 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/2/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Herculean Babies Pediatrics, in an amount not to exceed $750,000 to provide pediatric primary care services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #27-743-8 with Herculean Babies Pediatrics ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-743-8 with Herculean Babies Pediatrics,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $750,000,to provide pediatric primary care services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $750,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain pediatric primary care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing these services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since March 1,2008.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3, CCHP Physician Services are exempt from solicitation requirements. On February 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-743-7 with Herculean Babies Pediatrics, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0548,Version:1 On February 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-743-7 with Herculean Babies Pediatrics, in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000,for the provision of pediatric primary care services for CCHP members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. Approval of Contract #27-743-8 will allow the contractor to continue providing pediatric primary care services to CCHP members and county recipients through February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain pediatric primary care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0549 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Seneca Family of Agencies, in an amount not to exceed $1,057,429 to provide mobile crisis response services for youth in Contra Costa County for the period January 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024. (100% Mental Health Services Act) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #74-577-6 with Seneca Family of Agencies ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #74-577-6 with Seneca Family of Agencies, a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $1,057,429 to provide mobile crisis response services for youth experiencing a mental health crisis, for the period January 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in budgeted expenditures of up to $1,057,429 funded 100% by Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of the County’s population by providing mobile crisis response to youth in Contra Costa County who are in acute psychiatric distress and/or Seriously Emotionally Disturbed. Services are being provided through the Contra Costa County Behavioral Health Services Division’s Mental Health Services Act (“MHSA”) Community Services and Supports (CSS) Program. This contractor provides mobile crisis stabilization services to youth experiencing a mental health crisis through Contractor’s Mobile Response Teams (MRT). MRT will assist with crisis stabilization, placement stabilization, to decrease need for police involvement, reduce unnecessary hospitalizations, assist youth in accessing emergency psychiatric care when needed, and assess the youth’s current mental health needs. Services are based in East, West, and Central Contra Costa County, integrated with the County’s Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime (A3) initiative. The County has been contracting with Seneca Family of Agencies since October 2018. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: Welfare and Institutions Code, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0549,Version:1 § 5600 et seq. (The Bronzan McCorquodale Act); California Code of Regulations (“CCR”), Title 9, § 523 et seq. (Community Mental Health Services) and California Government Code §§ 26227 and 31000. This contract was approved by Health Services Personnel to ensure there is no conflict with labor relations. The Behavioral Health’s Quality Management, Utilization Management and Contract Monitor Staff meet on a regular basis to ensure monitoring and performance measures in the contract are upheld. This contractor was approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on December 31, 2023. On December 14, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #74-577-5 with Seneca Family of Agencies, in an amount not to exceed $3,748,857 to provide mobile crisis response and children’s specialty mental health services for SED children, for the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, which included a six-month automatic extension through December 31, 2023, in an amount not to exceed $1,874,428. Approval of Contract #74-577-6 will allow Contractor to continue providing mobile crisis response services through June 30, 2024. This contract is late due to the CalAIM initiative and continued negotiations between the Division and Contractor. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,Contra Costa youth will not have access to contractor’s mobile crisis response services, possibly resulting in the need for higher levels of care. CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’community outcomes:“Children Ready for and Succeeding in School”;“Families that are Safe,Stable,and Nurturing”;and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”.Expected program outcomes include an increase in positive social and emotional development as measured by the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0550 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with ABL Health Care, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide home health care services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-440-1 with ABL Health Care, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-440-1 with ABL Health Care,LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,to provide home health care services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)Members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $300,000 over a two-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain Home Health Services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing these services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since March 1,2022.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs. The nature of the home health services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination,integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of 55 providers in CCHP’s service area. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0550,Version:1 collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of 55 providers in CCHP’s service area. CCHP is currently contracted with 50 home health agencies.This contract renewal will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC)services. This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on January 9, 2024. On March 22,2022,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-440 with with ABL Health Care,LLC,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,for the provision of home health care services for CCHP members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2022 through February 29, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-440-1 will allow the contractor to continue providing home health care services to CCHP members and county recipients through February 28, 2026. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain home health care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0551 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Locumtenens.com, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000 to provide temporary physician coverage during peak loads, temporary absences, vacations and emergency situations where additional physician staffing is required at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #26-395-33 with Locumtenens.com, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #26-395-33 with Locumtenens.com,LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000,to provide temporary physician services to Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC),for the period January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in annual contractual service expenditures of up to $2,000,000 and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCRMC has an obligation to provide medical staffing services to patients.Therefore,the county contracts with temporary help firms to ensure patient care is provided during peak loads,temporary absences,vacations and emergency situations where additional staffing is required.The county has been using the contractor’s temporary staffing services since January 1,2001.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 CCRMC Physician services are exempt from Solicitation requirements. On January 17,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-395-30 with Locumtenens.com,LLC,in an amount not to exceed $600,000,for the provision of locum tenens physicians to cover during vacation,sick leave,and extended leave relief for County-employed physicians at CCRMC for the period from January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023. On July 11,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment Contract #26-395-31 withCONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0551,Version:1 On July 11,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment Contract #26-395-31 with Locumtenens.com,LLC,in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000,for the provision of locum tenens physicians to provide additional coverage for vacation,sick leave,and extended leave relief for County-employed physicians at CCRMC for the period from January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023. Approval of Contract #26-395-33 will allow contractor to continue providing temporary locum tenens physician services,through December 31,2024.This contract includes services provided by represented classifications and the county has met its obligations with the respective labor partner(s). CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,contractor will not provide temporary physician coverage during peak loads, temporary absences, vacations and emergency situations when additional physician staffing is required. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0552 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Spin Recruitment, Inc. (dba Spin Recruitment Advertising), in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide advertising and recruitment services for the Health Services Department for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2025. (100% County General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #23-467-17 with Spin Recruitment, Inc. (dba Spin Recruitment Advertising) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #23-467-17 with Spin Recruitment Inc.(dba Spin Recruitment Advertising),a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide advertising and recruitment services for the Health Services Department, for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in annual expenditures of up to $250,000 and will be funded 100%by County General Fund. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the business needs of the County by providing targeted outreach for healthcare personnel recruitment through a myriad of sources.This contractor has been providing services to the Health Services Department since April 1,2011.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §31000.This contract was approved by Health Services Personnel to ensure there is no conflict with labor relations.The Office of the Director’s contract monitoring staff meet on a regular basis to ensure monitoring of performance measures set forth in the contract are upheld.This contractor was approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on January 10, 2024. On March 21,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-467-16 with Spin Recruitment Inc.(dba Spin Recruitment Advertising),Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $250,000 to provide advertising services for the Health Services Department, for the period April 1, 2023 through March 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #23-467-17 will allow the contractor to continue to provide advertising and recruitment CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0552,Version:1 Approval of Contract #23-467-17 will allow the contractor to continue to provide advertising and recruitment services for the health services department through March 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved the County will not receive the necessary advertising and recruitment services to recruit candidates for vacant county positions. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0553 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with the City of San Pablo, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $340,127 for the Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement Program to provide homeless outreach services for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2026. (No County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Agreement #29-820-5 with the City of San Pablo ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Agreement #29-820-5 with the City of San Pablo, a government agency, to pay the County an amount not to exceed $340,127 for the Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement (CORE) Program to provide homeless outreach services, for the period from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Agreement will allow the County to receive an amount not to exceed $340,127 over a three- year period from the City of San Pablo to provide homeless outreach services. No County match is required. BACKGROUND: The CORE Program locates and engages homeless clients throughout Contra Costa County. CORE teams serve as an entry point into the County’s coordinated entry system for unsheltered persons and work to locate, engage, stabilize and house chronically homeless individuals and families. The County has been providing these services to the City of San Pablo since December 1, 2018. On February 26, 2019, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Agreement #29-820 to receive funds in an amount of $60,570 from the City of San Pablo to operate the CORE Program and provide services to the City of San Pablo through November 30, 2019. On January 14, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Amendment #29-820-1 to receive additional CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0553,Version:1 funds up to $40,000 to a new total of $100,570 and extend the termination date from November 30, 2019 to November 30, 2020. On March 30, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Amendment #29-820-2 to receive additional funds up to $25,000 to a new total of $125,570 and extend the termination date from November 30, 2020 to November 30, 2021. On June 7, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Amendment #29-820-3 to receive additional funds up to $58,493 to a new total of $184,063 and extend the termination date from November 30, 2021 to June 30, 2022. On July 26, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Amendment #29-820-4 to receive additional funds up to $100,416 to a new total of $284,479 and extend the termination date from November 30, 2022 to June 30, 2023. Approval of Agreement #29-820-5 will allow County to continue to receive funds through June 30, 2026. This contract includes mutual indemnification to hold harmless both parties for any claims arising out of the performance of this Contract. This Grant agreement is late due to the Division not receiving the grant document until January 8, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, County will not receive funding and without such funding, the CORE program may have to operate at a reduced capacity. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0554 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (dba Heluna Health), to pay County an amount not to exceed $25,000 for participation in the FoodNet Expanded Case Exposure Ascertainment Project to study foodborne bacteria for the period August 1, 2023 through July 31, 2024. (No County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Agreement #29-818-6 with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (dba Heluna Health) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Grant Agreement #29-818-6 containing mutual indemnification with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (dba Heluna Health), a nonprofit corporation, to pay County an amount not to exceed $25,000 for participation in the FoodNet Expanded Case Exposure Ascertainment (eCEA) Project for the period from August 1, 2023 through July 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This agreement will result in an amount not to exceed $25,000 in funding from the Public Health Foundation Enterprises. (No County match) BACKGROUND: The Health Services Department’s Public Health Division receives hundreds of reports of Salmonellosis and Shigellosis cases annually. There are likely many cases that do not get reported because community members do not see their doctor or confirmatory testing is not performed. These infections can result in serious illness and hospitalization across the age spectrum. Administering the expanded case report and the eCEA questionnaire will allow health officials to gathering additional information that could result in enhanced disease prevention and control activities. On November 29 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Grant Agreement #29-818-5 with Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. (dba Heluna Health) to receive funds in the amount of $25,000 for participation in CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0554,Version:1 the eCEA, to study foodborne bacteria, for the period from August 1, 2022 through July 31, 2023. Approval of Agreement #29-818-6 will allow county to continue to receive funds to support the eCEA Project, through July 31, 2024. This agreement includes mutual indemnification. This agreement is late due to the Division not receiving the grant document from the grantor until December 20, 2023. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this agreement is not approved, County will not receive funding to provide services for the eCEA Project. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0555 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Shelter, Inc., to extend the term through December 31, 2024 with no change in the payment limit of $500,000 to continue providing rapid rehousing services to individuals and families experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of becoming homeless in Contra Costa County. (100% Homeless, Housing, Assistance and Prevention funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Extension Agreement #25-116-1 with Shelter, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Extension Agreement #25-116-1 with Shelter, Inc., a non-profit corporation, to amend Contract #25-116, effective June 30, 2024, to extend the termination date from June 30, 2024 to December 31, 2024 with no change in the payment limit of $500,000 to continue providing rapid rehousing services to individuals and families experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of becoming homeless in Contra Costa County. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this extension will not impact the budget of expenditures up to $500,000 and is funded 100% by Homeless, Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) funds. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of County’s population by providing rapid rehousing and housing support services to the homeless population in Contra Costa County. These services include case management which will assist participants with food assistance, substance use treatment, education and training, employment and benefits assistance, health care, mental health counseling, childcare, and credit repair. Rapid rehousing services will include providing financial assistance for security deposits, utility deposits/payments, moving costs, hotel/motel vouchers, paid shelter costs, housing application and credit/background check fees, partial, tiered or full rental subsidies, to individuals and families experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of becoming homeless. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code § CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0555,Version:1 26227 and 31000. This contract was approved by Health Services Personnel to ensure there is no conflict with labor relations. The Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division Contract Monitoring staff meet on a regular basis to ensure monitoring of performance measures set forth in the contract are upheld. The request for proposal (RFP) was posted on January 11, 2023 and closed on March 3, 2023. Shelter, Inc. was selected through the RFP process on April 28, 2023. On October 24, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #25-116 with Shelter, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the provision of rapid rehousing services to individuals and families experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of becoming homeless for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. Approval of Extension Agreement #25-116-1 will allow the contractor to continue providing services through December 31, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this extension is not approved, individuals and families will not receive the necessary rapid rehousing and housing support services further putting individuals and families experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of becoming homeless at risk. CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’ community outcomes: “Children Ready for and Succeeding in School”; “Families that are Safe, Stable, and Nurturing”; and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”. Expected program outcomes include an increase in positive social and emotional development as measured by the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0556 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions), effective March 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $169,583 to an amount not to exceed $2,330,170 and extend the term through September 30, 2024 to continue providing rapid rehousing and homeless prevention services to families enrolled in County’s Employment and Human Services Department CalWORKs program. (100% Employment and Human Services Department) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment/Extension Agreement #25-083-6 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Amendment/Extension Agreement #25-083-6 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions), a non-profit corporation, to amend Contract #25-083-5, effective March 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $169,583, from $2,160,587 to a new payment limit of $2,330,170 and to extend the termination date from June 30, 2024 to September 30, 2024 to continue providing rapid rehousing and homeless prevention services to families enrolled in County’s Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) CalWORKs program and who are at risk of, or currently experiencing, homelessness. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment will result in additional contractual service expenditures of up to $169,583 and will be funded 100% by Employment and Human Services Department CalWORKs. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of county’s population by providing rapid rehousing and homeless prevention services to families who are at risk of, or currently experiencing, homelessness and recipients of EHSD’s CalWORKs program and who are eligible to receive services through California Department of Social Services (CDSS). This contract is supporting EHSD’s implementation of its Housing Support Program (HSP) funded by the CDSS. HSP provides prevention and time limited rental assistance and supportive services to Contra Costa CalWORKS families. The goal of HSP is to stabilize CalWORKS families with the end goal of self-sufficiency at program end which includes maintaining safe and stable housing without the need for on- CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0556,Version:1 going assistance. These services include case management which will assist participants with food assistance, substance use treatment, education and training, employment and benefits assistance, health care, mental health counseling, childcare, and credit repair. Rapid rehousing services will include providing financial assistance for security deposits, utility deposits/payments, moving costs, hotel/motel vouchers, paid shelter costs, housing application and credit/background check fees, partial, tiered or full rental subsidies. This contractor has been providing housing services for Contra Costa County since August 2019. This contractor has been a longstanding partner in previous projects, fostering a deep understanding of our organization's mission, values, and long-term objectives. Engaging them again will enable knowledge transfer, avoiding knowledge gaps and ensuring continuity in service delivery to vulnerable populations experiencing housing instability or homelessness. The request for proposal (RFP) was posted on January 11, 2023 and closed on March 3, 2023. Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions) was selected through the RFP process on April 28, 2023. On October 24, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #25-083-5 with Contra Costa Interfaith Transitional Housing, Inc. (dba Hope Solutions), in an amount not to exceed $2,160,587 to provide rapid rehousing and homeless prevention services to homeless Contra Costa County residents to help CalWORKs families achieve self-sufficiency and housing stability for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. Approval of Amendment/Extension Agreement #25-083-6 will allow the contractor to continue to provide rapid rehousing and homeless prevention services through September 30, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, homeless CalWORKs individuals and families in Contra Costa County may not receive assistance with housing putting individuals and families further at risk. CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT: This program supports the following Board of Supervisors’community outcomes:“Families that are Safe, Stable,and Nurturing”;and “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families”.Expected program outcomes include an increase in positive social and emotional development as measured by the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0557 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Spok Inc., in an amount not to exceed $119,000 to provide hardware, software, implementation, maintenance and support for the upgrade of the telephone system at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period February 27, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #23-832 with Spok Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #23-832 with Spok Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $119,000,to provide hardware, software,implementation,maintenance,training and support for the upgrade of the telephone system at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC), for the period from February 27, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $119,000 over a 3-year period and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. (5% Annual Rate Increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the needs of the County by providing hardware,software,implementation,training,project management,maintenance,and support services regarding CCRMC telephone system.CCRMC has been using Spok's IntelliDesk-Healthcare Console since 2015,whereby the traditional call handling process is automated, utilizing Spok's propriety software to process calls.The platform's computer telephony integration and centralized directory capabilities consolidate various systems to present all directory listings to operators,thus enabling quick directory lookups and facilitating essential functions such as paging and messaging staff,call transfers,and access to on-call schedules.Additionally,the software guides operators through necessary steps, such as critical codes, during emergencies. In 2023,the Purchasing Manager issued purchase order #027241 to Spok,Inc.,for the annual renewal of support and maintenance of the current Spok console for the period March 1,2023,through February 29,2024. In compliance with Section III(B)(7)of the Purchasing Policy,in November 2023,CCRMC initiated the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0557,Version:1 In compliance with Section III(B)(7)of the Purchasing Policy,in November 2023,CCRMC initiated the renewal of services to be transferred to contract,and the Purchasing Manager issued Spok a one-time sole source for the services through February 28, 2027, the term of this contract. Under contract #23-832,the parties will execute a Master Service Agreement and Order Form concerning the upgrade of the Spok solution.This project will include professional services to install and migrate the Spok software to extend the service life of the Spok applications and workflows,also requiring an upgrade of CCRMC's existing Private Branch Exchange (PBX)system.Under the terms of the agreement,Spok’s total liability is limited to the fees paid by County to Spok in the year prior to County's notice of a claim,provided that the limitation does not apply to Spok’s indemnification obligations,bodily injury claims,damage to real or personal property, or HIPAA violations. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,CCRMC’s phone system will not be upgraded,and the current system,which has reached its end-of-life (currently operating on a Windows 7 desktop and 2012),risks becoming obsolete and no longer be supported,which could significantly disrupt CCRMC’s call handling processes,and by extension, patient care. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0558 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center), in an amount not to exceed $375,000 to provide outpatient psychotherapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #27-368-18 with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-368-18 with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center),a sole proprietor,in an amount not to exceed $375,000,to provide outpatient psychotherapy services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $375,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (Rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain outpatient psychotherapy services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing outpatient psychotherapy services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since February 1,1998. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0558,Version:1 The nature of outpatient psychotherapy services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination, integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of 76 providers in CCHP’s service area.CCHP is currently contracted with 65 behavioral health therapy agencies.This contract renewal will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-Keene Act, time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) services.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on January 17, 2024. On March 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-368-17 with John Patrick Leonard Kirby (dba River Counseling Center),in an amount not to exceed $330,000,for the provision of outpatient psychotherapy services for CCHP members and county recipients,for the period March 1,2021 through February 29, 2024. Approval of Contract #27-368-18 will allow the contractor to continue providing outpatient psychotherapy services to CCHP members and county recipients through February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain outpatient psychotherapy services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0559 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Computacenter United States Inc., in an amount not to exceed $398,708 for the purchase of Dell PowerEdge Servers and hardware and software support and maintenance services for the period from April 1, 2024 through May 1, 2029. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Purchase Order with Computacenter United States Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Computacenter United States Inc., in an amount not to exceed $398,708 for the purchase of Dell PowerEdge Servers and five years of hardware and software support and maintenance services for the period from April 1, 2024 through May 1, 2029. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in a one-time hardware expenditure and maintenance support expenditures of up to $398,708 over a 61-month period and will be funded by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa Health (CCH) continues to migrate desktops and individual productivity into virtual desktop and cloud-based platforms. This new cluster represents redundant capacity for some 2500 desktops. This will allow significantly improved disaster resilience providing virtual desktop to users currently working with Legacy PCs thereby extending the useful life of those desktop PCs. These servers are also required to provide capacity for the upcoming Windows 11 replacement efforts, as some 2,000 of the current PC's do not meet the hardware compatibility requirements. Migrating those workloads to these servers will obviate a $2,000,000 PC purchase, as well as all the labor required to deploy them. On February 14th, 2017, the Board approved agenda C.51 to execute a purchase order with Dell Marketing L.P and Dell’s Customer Purchase Agreement, which also governs this purchase. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0559,Version:1 On October 24th, 2023, the Board approved agenda C.52 to execute purchase order 29156 with Citrix and Computacenter and Computacenter’s Master Services Agreement, which also governs this purchase. From October 13, 2023 through October 27, 2023 a Request for Proposal (RFP) was conducted to solicit bids for High Density VDI Cluster Servers. Computacenter United States Inc. and Direct Systems Support both submitted proposals and evaluation units. After a thorough evaluation Computacenter United States Inc. was selected as the preferred vendor. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The current Citrix farm as used by Epic, requires a constant update of the servers in use to maintain valid support contracts on non-obsolete gear. Failure to routinely cycle the infrastructure puts the CCH in jeopardy of losing an install discount with Epic and reduces the reliability of Emergency Medical Records. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0560 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Connect Hearing, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide hearing aid dispensing services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-211-2 with Connect Hearing, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-211-2 with Connect Hearing,Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,to provide hearing aid dispensing services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients,for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $300,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain non-physician provider services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing hearing aid dispensing services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since April 1,2019.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000; Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.Contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.These contracted services were determined to be exempt from Administrative Bulletin 600.3 solicitation requirements by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0560,Version:1 In April 2021,the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #77 -211-1 with Connect Hearing,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $30,000,for the provision of hearing aid dispensing services for CCHP members and county recipients,for the period April 1,2021 through March 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-211-2 will allow the contractor to continue providing hearing aid dispensing services to CCHP members and county recipients through March 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain hearing aid dispensing services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0561 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Young M Kim, M.D. (dba Youngs OB/GYN), in an amount not to exceed $750,000 to provide obstetrics and gynecology services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #27-622-10 with Young M. Kim, M.D. (dba Youngs OB/GYN) ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-622-10 with Young M.Kim,M.D.(dba Youngs OB/GYN),a sole proprietor,in an amount not to exceed $750,000,to provide obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN)services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members and county recipients for the period March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $750,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain medical specialist provider health care services,including OB/GYN services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the County.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing these services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since March 1, 2006. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3,CCHP physician services are exempt from SolicitationCONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0561,Version:1 Programs.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3,CCHP physician services are exempt from Solicitation requirements. On March 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-622-9 with Young M.Kim,M.D.(dba Youngs OB/GYN),in an amount not to exceed $750,000,for the provision of OB/GYN services to CCHP members and county recipients, for the period March 1, 2021 through February 29, 2024. Approval of Contract #27-622-10 will allow the contractor to continue providing OB/GYN services to CCHP members and county recipients through February 28, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain specialized OB/GYN services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contract with the county will not be provided and may cause service to be delayed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0562 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Naman Shah, M.D., in an amount not to exceed $450,000 to provide emergency medicine physician services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #76-856 with Naman Shah, M.D. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #76-856 with Naman Shah,M.D.,an individual,in an amount not to exceed $450,000,to provide emergency medicine physician services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC)and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period from February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $450,000 over a two-year period and will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community,CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers relies on contractors to provide necessary emergency medicine specialty health services to its patients.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 CCRMC Physician services are exempt from Solicitation requirements. Approval of this new Contract #76-856,allows the contractor to provide emergency medicine services at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2026. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,the necessary emergency medicine physician services needed for patient care will not be available or will create increased wait times due to the limited number of specialty providers CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0562,Version:1 will not be available or will create increased wait times due to the limited number of specialty providers available within the community. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0563 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Dialysis Access Center, A Medical Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $2,700,000 to provide dialysis and ambulatory surgical services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #27-578-13 with Dialysis Access Center, A Medical Corporation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-578-13 with Dialysis Access Center, A Medical Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $2,700,000 to provide dialysis and ambulatory surgical services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members and County recipients for the period from April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $2,700,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized health care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county. This provider has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing dialysis and ambulatory surgical services since April 1, 2004. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code §§ 26227 and 31000; Health and Safety Code § 1451. Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations. This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience. Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs. Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3, CCHP Physician Services are exempt from solicitation requirements. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0563,Version:1 On March 23, 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-578-12 with Dialysis Access Center, A Medical Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $1,650,000 to provide dialysis and ambulatory surgical services for CCHP members for the period from April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #27-578-13 will allow the contractor to continue providing dialysis and ambulatory surgical services for CCHP members through March 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, certain specialized health care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and services may be delayed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0564 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Baltic Sea Manor, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $262,000 to provide augmented board and care services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Centers patients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #76-537-11 with Baltic Sea Manor, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #76-537-11 with Baltic Sea Manor,LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $262,000,to provide augmented board and care services for Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Contra Costa Health Centers patients, for the period from April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in annual expenditures of up to $262,000 and will be funded 100%by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: This contract meets the social needs of County’s population by providing augmented board and care services for CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers patients.This contractor has been providing these services since April 2016.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§ 26227 and 31000. This contract was approved by Health Services Personnel to ensure there is no conflict with labor relations. CCRMC’s Quality Management,Utilization Management and Contract Monitor Staff meet on a regular basis to ensure monitoring and performance measures in the contract are upheld.Contractor meets regulatory requirements and employs specially trained,experienced and licensed personnel to perform residential care services in an adult residential facility.This contract was approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on December 21, 2023. On April 18,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-537-10 with Baltic Sea Manor,LLC,in an CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0564,Version:1 On April 18,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-537-10 with Baltic Sea Manor,LLC,in an amount not to exceed $262,000,to provide augmented board and care services,for the period April 1,2023 through March 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #76-537-11 will allow the contractor to continue providing augmented board and care services through March 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,patients requiring augmented board and care services will not have access to the contractor’s services. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0565 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to provide long term acute care services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-032-5 with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-032-5 with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento,LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $600,000,to provide long term acute care (LTAC)services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $600,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized non-physician provider care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing LTAC services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission, values, and long-term objectives since February 2017. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.The nature of the LTAC services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination,integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of five (5)LTAC providers in CCHP’s CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0565,Version:1 and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of five (5)LTAC providers in CCHP’s service area and CCHP contracts with four (4)of these providers.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on November 29, 2023. On February 2,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-032-4 with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento,LLC,in an amount not to exceed $600,000,to provide LTAC services for CCHP members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2021 through January 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-032-5 will allow the contractor to continue providing LTAC services for CCHP members and county recipients through January 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved certain specialized long term acute care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0566 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with California Mental Health Services Authority in an amount not to exceed $240,791 to act as fiscal agent for the provision of specialty mental health services for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025. (100% Mental Health Realignment) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Participation Agreement #74-585-1 with California Mental Health Services Authority ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Participation Agreement #74-585-1 containing mutual indemnification with California Mental Health Services Authority,a government agency,in an amount not to exceed $240,791,to act as fiscal agent for the provision of specialty mental health services for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county,for the period from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this agreement will result in budgeted annual expenditures of up to $240,791 over a two-year period and will be funded 100% by Mental Health Realignment funds. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this agreement is for the contractor to act as a fiscal agent to perform fund transfers on behalf of counties to allow foster children who are placed outside of their county of original jurisdiction to access specialty mental health services in a timely manner.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3,government agencies are exempt from solicitation requirements.This agreement was approved by Health Services Personnel to ensure there is no conflict with labor relations. On October 23,2018,the Board of Supervisors approved Participation Agreement #74-585 with California Mental Health Services Authority,in an amount not to exceed $398,747,to act as fiscal agent for the provision of specialty mental health services for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county,for the period July 1, 2018 until terminated. Approval of Participation Agreement #74-585-1 terminates the prior agreement on June 30,2023 and allows CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0566,Version:1 Approval of Participation Agreement #74-585-1 terminates the prior agreement on June 30,2023 and allows the contractor to continue providing services through June 30,2025.This contract includes mutual indemnification.The Department did not receive the agreement from the contractor until November 28,2023, causing a delay in processing of agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this participation agreement is not approved,County will not be able to ensure timely access to care for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county for specialty mental health services. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0567 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Kerecis LLC in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to procure fish skin and biological dressing supplies for the Operating Department at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period from February 1, 2024 through July 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Directors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Purchase Order with Kerecis LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Kerecis LLC in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to procure fish skin and biological dressing supplies for the Operating Department at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for the period from February 1, 2024 through July 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: This action will result in expenditures of up to $600,000 and will be funded by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Kerecis's trademarked fish skin has little processing to preserve its similarity to human skin as opposed to animal-derived skin replacements. Human and pig tissues are used to make the majority of skin replacements. These are not the ideal options because thorough processing is necessary to eliminate the chance of disease transmission. This intense antiviral treatment removes most of the material's natural components, setting it apart from human skin. Research has shown that fish skin is more structurally similar to human skin than other skin substitutes. Since there is no known risk of viral infection transmission, fish skin is processed as minimally as possible to retain its constituent parts and structural integrity. Fish skin in its intact state is used to treat chronic wounds, including pressure ulcers, vascular ulcers, diabetic wounds, draining wounds, trauma wounds, and surgical wounds. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0567,Version:1 Kerecis LLC pricing is provided by the Vizient, Inc. Group Purchasing Organization. Approval of this purchase order will allow this vendor to provide fish skin and biological dressing supplies to CCRMC through July 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, CCRMC will not be able to provide the surgical needs of the general population of Contra Costa County. This can lead to delays or cancellation of surgeries, and lead to negative outcomes for our patients. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0568 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Health Management Associates, Inc., effective February 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $300,000 to a new payment limit of $600,000 for additional actuarial consulting services for the Contra Costa Health Plan with no change in the term ending September 30, 2024. (100% Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #23-773-3 with Health Management Associates, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #23-773-3 with Health Management Associates, Inc., a corporation, effective February 1, 2024, to amend Contract #23-773-2, to increase the payment limit by $300,000, from $300,000 to a new payment limit of $600,000 with no change in the original term of October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional annual expenditures of up to $300,000 and will be funded by 100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II as budgeted by the department in FY 2023-24. BACKGROUND: Health Management Associates, Inc has been providing actuarial services to the Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) since October 2022. The contractor’s services include analysis of CCHP historical claims data to determine the required Incurred But Not Reported Reserves (IBNR), assist in the completion of the annual Rate Development Template (RDT) deliverable to the State and provide comprehensive analysis of premium rating files from the State. On August 15, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-773-2 with Health Management Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide actuarial consulting services for the Contra Costa Health Plan, for the period from October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2024. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #23-773-3 will allow the contractor to provide additional CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0568,Version:1 actuarial consulting services related to the State CalAim implementation and the transition to a Single Plan Medi-Cal Model in Contra Costa County, through September 30, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, CCHP will not have the actuarial services required to meet State requirements or become a Single Plan Medi-Cal Model. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0569 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Northern California Cornea Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $900,000 to provide ophthalmology services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #27-779-8 with Northern California Cornea Associates, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-779-8 with Northern California Cornea Associates,Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $900,000,to provide ophthalmology services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients, for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $900,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain ophthalmology services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing these services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since April 1,2009.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3, CCHP physician services are exempt from solicitation requirements. On April 20,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-779-6 with Northern California Cornea CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0569,Version:1 On April 20,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-779-6 with Northern California Cornea Associates,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,for the provision of ophthalmology services for CCHP members and county recipients, for the period April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2024. On November 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment #27-779-7 with Northern California Cornea Associates,Inc.to increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $450,000 to provide additional Ophthalmology services for CCHP members,with no change in the original term of April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #27-779-8 will allow the contractor to continue providing ophthalmology services to CCHP members and county recipients through March 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain ophthalmology services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0606 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Hill- Rom Company, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $161,844 to provide preventative maintenance and repair services for specialty hospital beds at Contra Costa Regional Medical and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #76-832 with Hill-Rom Company, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #76-832 with Hill-Rom Company, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $161,844, to provide preventative maintenance and repair services for specialty hospital beds at Contra Costa Regional Medical (CCRMC) and Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in budgeted expenditures of up to $161,844 and is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Hill-Rom Company, Inc. will provide preventative maintenance and repair of specialty hospital beds and be responsible for the quality, technical accuracy, completeness and coordination of such services at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers. These specialty hospital beds include a highly specialized system that monitors patient vital signs such as patients’ heart and respiratory rates via bed sensors. The built-in censors provide seamless compatibility with CCRMC workflows on patient monitoring. The sensors sit under the mattress, do not attach to the patient, and check vital signs 100 times a minute and alert staff to any possible issues. The continuous patient monitoring device contains an integrated sensor in the bed frame that detects heart rate and respiratory rate through the surface and updates the readings twice per second. This information is compiled into an algorithm to create a running trend. The bed then alerts when heart rate or respiratory rate exceeds a customizable threshold. The specialty hospital beds aid CCRMC staff in identifying signs of patient deterioration so they can intervene early, which promotes safety and minimizes risk to the patient. This CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0606,Version:1 contractor’s preventative maintenance services are essential for achieving optimal results and ensuring the highest level of patient care. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code §§ 26227 and 31000. Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations. Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 this contractor was been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on September 20, 2023. Under new Contract #76-832, this contractor will provide preventative maintenance and repair services, through January 31, 2027. This contract includes limited liability provisions. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, preventative maintenance and repair services required for specialty hospital beds for patient care will not be available and patients cannot be placed or re-homed from other facilities on a timely basis, putting their medical and overall care at risk. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0570 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Medline Industries, LP, effective February 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $2,116,950 for end-to-end distribution services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Center locations with no change in the term ending June 30, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #76-809-1 with Medline Industries, LP ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #76-809-1 with Medline Industries, LP, an Illinois limited partnership, effective February 1, 2024, to amend Contract #76-809, to increase the payment limit by $2,116,950 for end-to- end distribution services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers with no change in the original term of December 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional of up to $2,116,950 and will be funded as budgeted by the department in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Medline Industries, LP is the primary distribution for medical and non-medical supplies and products for CCRMC and Health Centers. They have been awarded a Vizient Group Purchasing (GPO) Agreement for the distribution of contracted and non-contracted supplies. As a Vizient member, CCRMC and Health Centers receive enhanced value form their participation in the Medline/Vizient GPO. On December 13, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-809 with Medline Industries, LP, to commit to purchase 90% of medical supplies, surgical supplies, laboratory supplies, diagnostic imaging supplies, cleaning supplies, disaster supplies and miscellaneous minor equipment for CCRMC and Health Center for the period December 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025. This distribution agreement allows the department to receive discounted prices and rebates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0570,Version:1 Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #76-809-1 will allow the contractor to provide additional end-to- end distribution services including daily inventory, removal of recalled products, product replenishment, quality control and annual physical inventory, through June 30, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, distribution of vital medical supplies would be negatively impacted, and patient care services compromised across the County health system. CCRMC’s current staffing complement is not sufficient to receive and distribute the daily bulk shipments and replenish the 120 medical supply carts at CCRMC and Health Centers. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0616 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay the Virtusa Corporation an amount not to exceed $45,617 for a compliance reporting software subscription for the period from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024, as recommended by the Health Services Director. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Directors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Payment for Subscription Provided by Virtusa Corporation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay the Virtusa Corporation up to $45,617 for compliance reporting software subscription for the period from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in an expenditure of up to $45,617 and will be funded by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Virtusa Corporation’s CareDiscovery Quality Measures (CDQM) software is used by Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for compliance reporting to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The data submitted through the platform meets the requirements established by CMS' Inpatient and Outpatient Hospital Quality Reporting programs for clinical quality measures and accreditation purposes. Contra Costa Health Information Technology staff had been working with Virtusa Corporation since early 2023 to establish an agreement ahead of the December 2023 software subscription expiration. Unfortunately, an agreement could not be reached with Virtusa regarding the business associate addendum. CCRMC and Health Centers require access to the CDQM software to ensure compliance reporting requirements are met while an agreement with a new vendor for 2025 is established. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0616,Version:1 If this action is not approved, CCRMC will not have access to the software needed to submit data for compliance reporting to CMS. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0571 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the new medical staff, affiliates, and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, medical staff advancement and voluntary resignations as recommended by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, and by the Health Services Director. (No fiscal impact) Attachments:1. October List approved 11.7.23, 2. Revised October List Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Rescind Prior Board Action of November 7, 2023 (C.57) & Approve Medical Staff Appointments and Reappointments as of October 17, 2023 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RESCIND prior Board action of November 7, 2023 (C.57), which approved the October list of medical staff appointments and reappointments; and APPROVE the new medical staff, affiliates, and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, medical staff advancement, and voluntary resignations as recommended by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, at their October 17, 2023 meeting, and by the Health Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: The Medical Staff Executive committee recommended Alexa Lomongsod, NP at their October 17, 2023 meeting and the nurse practitioner was not included on the October List in error. The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has requested that evidence of Board of Supervisors approval for each Medical Staff member be placed in his or her Credentials File. The above recommendations for appointment/reappointment were reviewed by the Credentials Committee and approved by the Medical Executive Committee at their October 17, 2023 meeting. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Contra Costa Regional Medical and Contra Costa Health Centers' medical staff would not be appropriately credentialed and not be in compliance with The Joint Commission on CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0571,Version:1 Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ A. Applications for Staff Membership Applicant Department/ Speciality Reviewer Lin, Kywa, DO Internal Medicine-Neurology Veda Bhatt, MD B. Applications for Staff Affiliation Applicant Department Reviewer Kiruuta, Paul, NP DFAM Humphrey C. Applications for Vrad Applicant Department Reviewer Watson, Robert, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Abdul-Wahab, Muhammad, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McQueen, Teresa, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McNair, Cierra, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Garvin, Daniel, OD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Pitts, Jennifer, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD D. Staff Advancing to Non-Provisional Provider Department Staff Status Tafoya, Matthew, MD Emergency Medicine Active Ajuria, Michael, MD Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Zaman, Warda, DO Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Loeza, Joanna, MD OB/GYN- DFAM Active E. Biennial Reappointments Provider Department Staff Status Bui, Lamson, Psy.D Psychiatry/Psychology A Butler, Kimberly, MD DFAM A Castillo, Carla, MD DFAM P Faramazyan, Alina, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Feddersen, Michael, DO Psychiatry/Psychology C Harrison, Steven, MD Surgery A Howell, Tiffany, MD Pediatrics A Josephson, Scott, MD Internal Medicine C Lau, Edward, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Anna M. Roth, R.N., M.S., M.P.H. Health Services Director Samir B. Shah, M.D., F.A.C.S Chief Executive Officer Contra Costa County Regional Medical Center and Health Centers Contra Costa Health Services CONTRA COSTA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AND HEALTH CENTERS 2500 Alhambra Avenue Martinez, California 94553-3156 Ph. 925-370-5000 Credentials Committee Recommendations 10/19/2023 1 Liss, William, MD Internal Medicine A Maitra, Sarbani, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Manuchehry, Amir, MD Anesthesia P Matthys, Andrew, MD Internal Medicine P Nguyen, Minh, MD Critical Care A Pai, Vidya, MD Pediatrics C Shah, Maulik, MD Internal Medicine C Silver, Deborah, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Tulshian, Priyanka, MD Hosptial Medicine A Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN A Wu, Katherine, MD Pediatrics C F. Biennial Renewal of Privileges-Affiliates Provider Department Staff Category Cedermaz, Heather, NP DFAM AFF Daisley, Erin, FNP DFAM AFF Humphrey, Kimberly, NP Pediatrics AFF G. Biennial Reappointments for Teleradiologists (vRad) Provider Department Reviewed By Ghani, Mazen, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller Gierbolini, Mayte, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller H. Additional Privileges Provider Department Reviewed By Boittin, Nathalie, MD OB/GYN DFAM Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN DFAM I. Voluntary Resignation Provider Department Dhatt, Jagjiwan, FNP DFAM Parish, Austin, MD Emergency Medicine Suchow, David, MD DFAM Ubhayakar, Kiran, MD Internal Medicine Credentials Committee Recommendations 10/19/2023 2 A. Applications for Staff Membership Applicant Department/ Speciality Reviewer Lin, Kywa, DO Internal Medicine-Neurology Veda Bhatt, MD B. Applications for Staff Affiliation Applicant Department Reviewer Kiruuta, Paul, NP DFAM Humphrey Lomongsod, Alexa, NP DFAM Mbanugo C. Applications for Vrad Applicant Department Reviewer Watson, Robert, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Abdul-Wahab, Muhammad, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McQueen, Teresa, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McNair, Cierra, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Garvin, Daniel, OD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Pitts, Jennifer, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD D. Staff Advancing to Non-Provisional Provider Department Staff Status Tafoya, Matthew, MD Emergency Medicine Active Ajuria, Michael, MD Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Zaman, Warda, DO Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Loeza, Joanna, MD OB/GYN- DFAM Active E. Biennial Reappointments Provider Department Staff Status Bui, Lamson, Psy.D Psychiatry/Psychology A Butler, Kimberly, MD DFAM A Castillo, Carla, MD DFAM P Faramazyan, Alina, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Feddersen, Michael, DO Psychiatry/Psychology C Harrison, Steven, MD Surgery A Howell, Tiffany, MD Pediatrics A Josephson, Scott, MD Internal Medicine C Lau, Edward, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Anna M. Roth, R.N., M.S., M.P.H. Health Services Director Samir B. Shah, M.D., F.A.C.S Chief Executive Officer Contra Costa County Regional Medical Center and Health Centers Contra Costa Health Services CONTRA COSTA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AND HEALTH CENTERS 2500 Alhambra Avenue Martinez, California 94553-3156 Ph. 925-370-5000 Credentials Committee Recommendations 2/12/2024 1 Liss, William, MD Internal Medicine A Maitra, Sarbani, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Manuchehry, Amir, MD Anesthesia P Matthys, Andrew, MD Internal Medicine P Nguyen, Minh, MD Critical Care A Pai, Vidya, MD Pediatrics C Shah, Maulik, MD Internal Medicine C Silver, Deborah, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Tulshian, Priyanka, MD Hosptial Medicine A Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN A Wu, Katherine, MD Pediatrics C F. Biennial Renewal of Privileges-Affiliates Provider Department Staff Category Cedermaz, Heather, NP DFAM AFF Daisley, Erin, FNP DFAM AFF Humphrey, Kimberly, NP Pediatrics AFF G. Biennial Reappointments for Teleradiologists (vRad) Provider Department Reviewed By Ghani, Mazen, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller Gierbolini, Mayte, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller H. Additional Privileges Provider Department Reviewed By Boittin, Nathalie, MD OB/GYN DFAM Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN DFAM I. Voluntary Resignation Provider Department Dhatt, Jagjiwan, FNP DFAM Parish, Austin, MD Emergency Medicine Suchow, David, MD DFAM Ubhayakar, Kiran, MD Internal Medicine Credentials Committee Recommendations 2/12/2024 2 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0572 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26264 to increase the hours of two Certified Nursing Assistant positions in the Health Services Department. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments:1. P300-26264, 2. Signed P300 C.109.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Increase the Hours of Two Certified Nursing Assistant Positions in the Health Services Department ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26264 to increase the hours of one (1) Certified Nursing Assistant (VTWA) position #15705 at salary plan and grade TA5-0906 ($3,664 - $4,453) and its incumbent EE#93807 from 24/40 to 32/40 (6313 - Inpatient Psychiatric Services); and increase the hours of one (1) Certified Nursing Assistant position #11202 at salary plan and grade TA5-0906 ($3,664 - $4,453) and its incumbent EE#73600 from 32/40 to 40/40 (6505 - Nursing Administration) in the Health Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this request will result in an annual increase of approximately $34,328.24 with pension costs of $5,015 already included. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) BACKGROUND: Per Teamsters Local 856 MOU, section 48 - Position Hours Adjustment, incumbents have the ability to submit requests during the months of January and/or July to have their position hours adjusted. Management reviews and evaluates these requests by considering the actual work hours of the employee over the past six (6) months and the anticipated needs of the department. The incumbent of Certified Nursing Assistant position #15705 has requested to increase their hours from 24/40 to 32/40; and the incumbent of Certified Nursing Assistant position #11202 has requested to increase their hours from 32/40 to 40/40. After reviewing each request, management has determined that both incumbents have been consistently working increased hours over the past 6 months and are in agreement with adjusting the hours of both positions as requested. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0572,Version:1 If not approved, the County will not be complying with the negotiated MOU terms previously agreed upon with the union. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0573 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26265 to increase the hours of one Registered Nurse position from Permanent-Intermittent to Permanent Part-Time in the Health Services Department. (Cost Savings, Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments:1. P300-26265, 2. Signed P300 26265.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Increase One Registered Nurse Position from Permanent-Intermittent to Permanent Part-Time in the Health Services Department. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26265 to increase one (1) Registered Nurse (VWXG) position #8058 at salary plan and grade L32-1880 ($12,004 - $14,991) and its incumbent EE#83332 from permanent- intermittent to permanent part-time 32/40 in the Health Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this request will result in an annual cost savings of approximately $57,780.50 with pension costs of $8,441.13 already included. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) BACKGROUND: Per California Nurses Association MOU, section 6.5 - Position Hours Adjustment, incumbents have the ability to submit requests during the months of January and/or July to have their position hours adjusted. Management reviews and evaluates these requests by considering the actual work hours of the employee over the past six (6) months and the anticipated needs of the department moving forward. After reviewing this request, the department is in agreement with adjusting position #8058 from permanent-intermittent to permanent part-time 32/40, as this change will have no negative impact to operations. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the County will not be complying with the negotiated MOU terms previously agreed upon with the union. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0573,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0574 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26263 to add one (1) full-time Senior Buyer (represented) position and one (1) full-time Buyer II (represented) position in the Public Works Department and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE budget adjustment No. BDA-24-00018 transferring $49,084 from the general fund to fund the positions. (100% General Fund) Attachments:1. PAF - Add Purchasing positions, 2. Budget_Amendment__FY_2023-24_-_BDA-24-00018 Purchasing, 3. Signed P300 26263.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Position Adjustment to add one full-time Senior Buyer and one full-time Buyer II ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. to add one (1) full-time Senior Buyer (STTB) (represented) position at salary plan and grade ZB5 1631 ($7,510-$9,129) and one (1) full-time Buyer II (STTA) (represented) position at a salary plan and grade ZB5 1525 ($6,762-$8,219) in the Public Works Department. APPROVE budget adjustment No. BDA-24-00018 and AUTHORIZE the transfer of $49,084 from the general fund to salary and benefits to fund the positions in the Public Works Department. FISCAL IMPACT: This action will result in increased salary costs of $46,084, including $5,515 in retirement costs. BACKGROUND: The two positions are requested to address the increased procurement workload to support County departments to comply with the new Purchasing Administrative Bulletin approved by this Board on June 27,2023.The new bulletin sets purchasing policies and requirements to achieve minimum standards for the purchase of services, materials,supplies,equipment,furnishings,and other personal property for County departments.County departments are complying with the new bulletin which has resulted in an increase in formal solicitations and requests for Purchasing support. An additional Senior Buyer is requested to process more complex commodities.An additional Buyer II position is requested to assist with the increased volume of purchase orders and formal solicitations. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0574,Version:1 Purchasing is updating the Small Business Enterprise (SBE)policies into one Administrative Bulletin and plans to conduct regular outreach to small businesses.Purchasing is also tasked with developing training for county staff on various purchasing policies and procedures.Purchasing cannot provide these services without additional staff resources. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved,the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division will not be able to provide additional purchasing support to County departments. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ View Budget Amendment: Budget Amendment: FY 2023-24 - Operating Budget on 02/08/2024 : BDA-24-00018 08:42 AM 02/08/2024 Page 1 of 2 Company Contra Costa County Budget Template Operating Budget : FY2023-24 Operating Budget Budget FY2023-24 Operating Budget Organizing Dimension Type Amendment ID BDA-24-00018 Amendment Date 02/08/2024 Description To appropriate funds from the general fund to Public Works Purchasing for the addition of two positions in FY 23-24: 1 Senior Buyer and 1 Buyer II. Staff Report scheduled for 2/27/24. Amendment Type Appropriation / Estimated Revenue Adjustment Balanced Amendment Yes Entry Type Mid-Year Adjustments Status In Progress Budget Amendment Entries Period *Ledger Account/Summary Home Organization *Cost Center *Fund Debit Amount Credit Amount Memo Exceptions FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 9990:APPROPRIATED FUND BAL 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0005 REVENUE - GENERAL COUNTY 100300 GENERAL $0.00 $46,084.00 To fund STTB and STTA from general fund. FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1015:DEFERRED COMP CTY CONTRB 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $600.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1070:WORKERS COMPENSATION INS 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $1,581.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1011:PERMANENT SALARIES 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $28,545.00 $0.00 Salaries for STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1063:UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $57.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1060:EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $7,602.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1044:RETIREMENT EXPENSE 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $5,515.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1042:F.I.C.A.4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $2,184.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA Process History 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0575 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and ACKNOWLEDGE that, by its terms, the purchase order with 11:11 Systems, Inc. (as successor in interest to SunGard AS), pertaining to the renewal of DoIT’s IT systems and mainframe disaster recovery services and initially approved by the Board on February 6, 2024 (Item C.92), with an amount not to exceed of $70,000, does not terminate on the date previously specified in the Board action, but instead, terminates on June 30, 2025. (100% User Departments) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marc Shorr, Information Technology Director Report Title:Correction of Previous Board Action from February 6, 2024 (Item C.92) for Purchase Order with 11:11 Systems, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and ACKNOWLEDGE that, by its terms, the purchase order with 11:11 Systems, Inc. (as successor in interest to SunGard AS), pertaining to the renewal of DoIT’s IT systems and mainframe disaster recovery services and initially approved by the Board on February 6, 2024 (Item C.92), with an amount not to exceed of $70,000, does not terminate on the date previously specified in the Board action, but instead, terminates on June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this product is included in the department’s FY 23-24 budget. 100% User Departments. BACKGROUND: 11:11 Systems, Inc. (as successor in interest to SunGard AS) provides disaster recovery services including data restoration, testing and simulation, communication and reporting as well as post-recovery evaluation, which are designed to help recover and restore DoIT’s mainframe system and data in the event of a disruptive incident such as a natural disaster, hardware failure or other unforeseen event. Disaster recovery services are crucial for ensuring business continuity and minimizing the impact of unforeseen events on IT operations. The 11:11 Systems agreement contains mutual indemnification and a Limitation of Liability which limits the total aggregate liability of 11:11 Systems,its suppliers,resellers,partners,and their respective affiliates arising from or related to this agreement to the total amounts owed or paid by the County for the relevant products during the twenty-four (24)month period immediately preceding the first occurrence of the events giving rise CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0575,Version:1 during the twenty-four (24)month period immediately preceding the first occurrence of the events giving rise to such liability. 11:11 Systems, Inc. was chosen due to their current operational readiness and familiarity with DoIT’s mainframe system as well as their ability to restore DoIT’s mainframe and midrange systems in the event of a disruptive event or natural disaster. DoIT reviewed three informal bids; other vendors such as Baer Consulting Incorporated (BCI) and BMC Mainframe Services were evaluated and rejected because they did not provide the remote services that DoIT requested or mainframe restoration services that were not tied to managed services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If 11:11 Systems disaster recovery services are not extended DoIT will not have the ability to restore data in the event of a disaster or other unforeseen event. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0576 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $5,000 from East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, for Rodeo Library services, pursuant to the local refinery Good Neighbor Agreement, for the period July 1 through December 31, 2024. (No County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Apply for and Accept East Bay Community Foundation Grant Funds Administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council in the amount of $5,000 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Librarian,or designee,to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $5,000 from East Bay Community Foundation,administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council,for Rodeo Library services,pursuant to the local refinery Good Neighbor Agreement for the period July 1 through December 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: No County match. BACKGROUND: The County currently funds 18 hours of library service at the Rodeo Library. If granted, the $5,000 from The East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, will be used to fund additional hours of library service. The proposed additional hours will provide one extra hour of Saturday service, and five extra hours of service during the week. These extended hours offer Rodeo residents additional opportunities to make use of the educational and recreational resources available at the library. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the grant proposal is not approved, the Rodeo Library will remain open for the County funded 18 hours per week, instead of the proposed 24 hours per week. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0577 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Niche Academy, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for the renewal of a Niche Academy Online Learning Platforms subscription, for the period April 2, 2024 through April 2, 2025. (100% Library Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Purchase Order for renewal of Niche Academy Online Learning Platforms subscription through April 2, 2025 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order including modified indemnification language with Niche Academy, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for the renewal of Niche Academy Online Learning Platforms subscription, for the period April 2, 2024 through April 2, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Library Fund. BACKGROUND: The Library Department has used and continues to use Niche Academy,LLC,for its Online Learning Platform subscription.Niche Academy Online Learning Platform is a library-oriented learning management system that provides patrons and staff with tutorials that inform and educate them about library resources and how to use them.The system integrates with the public website to easily provide access to resource help that is relevant to Library patrons. The Terms and Conditions of the purchase order include an indemnification provision, approved by County Counsel. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library patrons will not have access to a learning platform that assists in how to use library resources. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0577,Version:2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0578 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Baker & Taylor, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $46,720 for renewal of the PressReader, a digital, translatable magazine and newspaper, for the period December 1, 2023 through November 30, 2024. (100% Library Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Purchase Order with Baker & Taylor, LLC for renewal of PressReader through November 30, 2024 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order including modified limitation of liability with Baker & Taylor, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $46,720 for renewal of the PressReader, for the period December 1, 2023 through November 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Library Fund. BACKGROUND: The Library Department has used and continues to use Baker &Taylor,LLC for PressReader.PressReader is a digital magazine and newspaper offered to Library patrons and sold by Baker &Taylor,LLC.The product provides access to over 7,000 titles from around the world and every newspaper and magazine on the platform can be translated instantly into one of eighteen languages,or the built- in reader can be used to hear the paper aloud.The digital content on the platform is available to users on the same day as the printed addition. The Terms and Conditions of the purchase order include a limitation of liability provision, approved by County Counsel. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library’s patrons will lose access to PressReader’s products. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0578,Version:2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0579 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Califa Group in an amount not to exceed $13,594 for the renewal of the Skillsoft 2.0 and IT Pro Books subscription, for the period December 31, 2023 through December 30, 2024. (100% Library Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Purchase order with Califa Group for renewal of Skillsoft Expert 2.0 and IT Pro Books subscription through December 30, 2024 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order including modified limitation of liability with Califa Group in an amount not to exceed $13,593.70 for the renewal of Skillsoft Expert 2.0 and IT Pro Books subscription, for the period December 31, 2023 through December 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: 100 % Library Fund BACKGROUND: The Library Department has and continues to use Califa Group,a nonprofit library membership consortium,that brokers and facilitates the procurement of library products and manages master contracts and pricing agreements with its vendors.The Contra Costa County Library has a membership with Califa Group granting access to these services.Skillsoft’s Skillsoft Expert 2.0 and IT Pro Books is one of the discounted subscriptions offered by Califa Group to its members.Skillsoft offers patrons a vast digital library with e-Book titles from hundreds of publishers,as well as IT,productivity,and collaboration e-courses.The videos feature an array of desktop and IT topics and are downloadable as MP4 and are 508-compliant for users with disabilities. The Terms and Conditions of the purchase order include limitation of liability provisions, approved by County Counsel. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library’s patrons will not have access to the services provided by this subscription. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0580 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with Strategies for Youth in an amount not to exceed $590,000 to provide the Policing the Teen Brain training program for interested law enforcement agencies in the County for the period October 1, 2023, through September 30, 2027. (100% Federal) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Esa Ehmen-Krause, County Probation Officer Report Title:Rescind Prior Board Action Pertaining to Contracted Services with Strategies for Youth ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RESCIND Board action on February 6, 2024 (C.100) regarding a contract agreement with Strategies for Youth, and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with Strategies for Youth in an amount not to exceed $590,000 to provide the Policing the Teen Brain training program for interested law enforcement agencies in the County for the period of October 1, 2023, through September 30, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no change in the contract funding or amount. This contract will still be 100% funded through a grant awarded in 2023 from the Federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. BACKGROUND: The Probation Department is the recipient of a federal Community Project Funding award for the Strategies for Supporting Youth in the Community Initiative. Probation’s Office of Reentry & Justice (ORJ) is the administrator of this Initiative and is contracting with Strategies for Youth to provide evidence-based training sessions on adolescent development to all interested law enforcement agencies in the County. Under this contract, Strategies for Youth will provide a 4-day Train-the-Trainer course with a customized training curriculum; and support the delivery of a 2-day Patrol Officer training course provided by newly CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0580,Version:1 trained officers at participating law enforcement agencies. This approach allows for specialized training to be available after the contract expires. The purpose of this Board Order is to correct the term to read October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2027 to match the contract term as agreed by the County and the contractor, and to match the grant award. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this correction is not approved, the Board Order would not reflect the correct contract term for the provision of services with Strategies for Youth under the grant awarded to Probation. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0581 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Probation Department, a purchase order with Clear Impact, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $25,000 to procure a subscription service for local community corrections community programs performance reporting for the period September 6, 2023 through September 6, 2024. (100% State) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Esa Ehmen-Krause, County Probation Officer Report Title:Purchase Order with Clear Impact, Inc. for Performance Reporting Software for the AB109 Community Programs ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Probation Department, to execute a Purchase Order containing modified indemnification with Clear Impact, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $25,000 for the purchase of a subscription service for performance reporting by the AB109 Community Programs for the period from September 6, 2023 through September 6, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% of the cost is covered by AB109 Planning and Implementation funding. BACKGROUND: The Probation Department, including the Office of Reentry and Justice, has moved towards a data driven decision making approach where evidence-based programming and monitoring will be conducted by both the Office of Reentry and Justice’s program staff, and Probation’s fiscal staff. The AB109 Community Providers report on the measures outlined in the program logic model, included in the performance contracts. The data entry component of the Clear Impact software is customizable to each specific programs metrics and performance indicators that are to be monitored and evaluated. This software will efficiently allow for multiple users to access the data related to a unique program and to quickly assess outcomes over time. The system surveys the programs and summarizes the responses. This work is currently done by both program and Probation staff entering information into Excel spreadsheets. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0581,Version:1 Under the terms of the Subscription Agreement the County is obligated to indemnify Clear Impact against third party claims based on unauthorized or illegal use of the service. In addition, Clear Impact’s liability is limited to the lesser of Five Thousand dollars or the amount paid by the County in the prior twelve months. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If unapproved,the Probation Department and AB109 Community Partners would not have an automated,user friendly, system that allows the monitoring and reporting of contract performance measures. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0582 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with UKG Kronos Systems LLC, in an amount not to exceed $40,893 for timekeeping software and support services for the period December 20, 2023 through December 19, 2024. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Esa Ehmen-Krause, County Probation Officer Report Title:UKG Kronos Systems LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract containing modified indemnification with UKG Kronos Systems LLC, in an amount not to exceed $40,893 for timekeeping software and support services for the period December 20, 2023 through December 19, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This total of $40,893 will be 100% funded by the General Fund. BACKGROUND: UKG Kronos Systems LLC provides automated timekeeping services to improve the efficiency of scheduling. This software sends out a notification to eligible staff when open shifts are available, and the timekeeping software can generate a payroll report to provide accurate information regarding regular and overtime pay. In the past, management did manual calling, clipboards, and handwritten notes. Probation currently has a contract with UKG Kronos LLC and is seeking to renew the contract. Under the Master Services Agreement, there are limitations of liability. During any twelve (12) month of the contract term, UKG’s total aggregate liability for any and all claims in connection with any service shall in no event exceed the amount paid or payable by customer to UKG during such twelve (12) month contract term for the service giving rise to such claim(s). Probation is seeking acceptance of this modified indemnification language as well to be able to utilize the Master Services Agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If unapproved Probation would not have automated timekeeping software and support for Juvenile Hall staff. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0582,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0583 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute a contract with Thomson Reuters West in an amount not to exceed $291,330 to provide print and online legal research and reference materials for the period of March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2029. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Ellen McDonnell, Public Defender Report Title:Contract - Thomson Reuters West ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute a contract with Thomson Reuters West in an amount not to exceed $291,330 to provide online legal research and reference materials for the period of March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2029. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Funds. The total cost is not to exceed $291,330 over the following years: FY 23/24: $18,660 FY 24/25: $55,981 FY 25/26: $57,101 FY 26/27: $58,243 FY 27/28: $59,407 FY 28/29: $41,938 BACKGROUND: Thomson Reuters West provides online subscription services to the Thomson West Proflex Online Law Library and provides access to various printed legal publications. These reference and research tools are essential components of effective legal representation. Thomson Reuters West offers its products to governmental agencies at a 55% discount from the vendor’s standard pricing. Agreement to a five-year service contract term further reduces the cost in that the annual increase, typically five percent (5%) will instead be capped at two percent (2%). The contract contains a CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0583,Version:1 provision limiting liability. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the contract is not approved, the Public Defender’s Office will be unable to access essential printed and online legal research and reference materials and will need to procure these resources at a higher cost. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0584 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/26/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Public Defender, a purchase order amendment with Caltronics Business Systems to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $315,000 for copier rentals and managed print services and to extend the term date through February 24, 2026. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Ellen McDonnell, Public Defender Report Title:Amendment to Purchase Order #020747 with Caltronics Business Systems ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Defender, a blanket purchase order (#020747) amendment with Caltronics Business Systems to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $315,000 and to extend the term end date from February 24, 2024 to February 24, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request would result in up to $100,000 in contractual expenditures over a two-year period, which would be fully funded by the department’s general fund allocation. The purchase order payment conditions include a monthly copier rental fee and established rates per sheet printed. BACKGROUND: Caltronics Business Systems provides copiers and copier services for the Public Defenders offices located at 800 Ferry St. Martinez, 627 Ferry St. Martinez, and 3811 Bissell Ave. Richmond. The request to extend the original term by two years is more cost effective than executing an annual amendment. Additionally, the extended term end date aligns with the term of the department’s other copier leases. Future copier services will be integrated into one purchase order to facilitate contract monitoring and usage. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0584,Version:1 If this amendment is not approved, the Department will not have access to copier rental and managed print services needed for its operations. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0585 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/4/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Nicolaos Theophanous (dba Theophanous Structural Engineers), to extend the term through December 31, 2024 with no change to the payment limit, to provide on-call structural services for various County facilities projects, Countywide. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve and Authorize Amendment No. 2 to Consulting Services Agreement with Nicolaos Theophanous d/b/a Theophanous Structural Engineers. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Nicolaos Theophanous (d/b/a Theophanous Structural Engineers) (Theophanous) effective February 27, 2024, to extend the term from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024, with no change to the payment limit to provide on-call structural engineering services for various County facilities projects, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact. BACKGROUND: On January 1, 2020 the Board of Supervisors approved a Contract with Theophanous in the amount of $195,000. On September 21, 2021 Amendment No. 1 was approved by the Board of Supervisors to increase the pay limit by $205,000 and to extend the term 1 year. Theophanous is currently engaged in ongoing projects for the County such as the Surgical Lights project and the Lab Automation project, both for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center. Theophanous is familiar with these active projects and is skilled at providing structural engineering services of the type that has often been of valuable service to the County. Therefore, it is recommended that this contract amendment be awarded at this time. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0585,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If Amendment No. 2 is not approved, active projects that Theophanous is involved with may suffer delays and increased costs and other currently unforeseen consequences resulting from the engineer of record no longer being involved with these active projects. Additionally, the County would lose the option of engaging Theophanous through the existing on-call contract to provide services on new projects of the type that Theophanous has frequently provided to the County in the past. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0586 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with PreScience Corporation, effective December 31, 2023, to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $1,727,747 for construction management services for the Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement Project, and to extend the term from December 31, 2023 to December 31, 2024, Concord area. (89% Federal Highway Bridge Program Funds, 11% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Amendment to Consulting Services Agreement with PreScience Corporation, Concord area ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract)amendment with PreScience Corporation,effective December 31st,2023,to increase the payment limit by $100,000.00 to a new payment limit of $1,727,747.28 for construction management services for the Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement Project,and to extend the term from December 31,2023 to December 31,2024,Concord area.(County Project No.:0662-6R4119)(Federal Project No.:BRLS-5928 (128))(District IV and V) FISCAL IMPACT: This project,including this Consulting Services Agreement,will be funded by 88.53%Federal Highway Bridge Program Funds and 11.47% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: The Project consists of removing the existing bridge on Marsh Drive over Walnut Creek (State Bridge No.28C- 0442),which is seismically,structurally,and hydraulically deficient,and construct a new concrete bridge in stages to current standard,reconstructing the roadway approaches from both ends of the bridge,constructing a new separated walking path on the south side of the bridge that will connect to the existing Iron Horse Trail, and incorporating drainage improvements,utility work,erosion control work,and roadway signing and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0586,Version:1 striping. PreScience was selected to provide construction management services for the Project after completing a request for proposal solicitation and technical proposal process.Construction management services for the Project includes full time inspection,quality assurance materials testing,quality assurance surveying,extensive coordination with project stakeholders including Caltrans,Contra Costa Water District,City of Concord,and the East Bay Regional Park District,and in-field decision making to ensure the Project is built per plans and specifications and meets County,City,and Caltrans Standards.Construction management services also include recording daily activity and equipment on-site and maintaining required project documentation.Public Works has successfully negotiated with PreScience to provide construction management services. On March 30,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved an initial contract with PreScience Corporation in the amount of $1,581,016.64 for construction management services for the Public Works Department.Although in- field construction is complete,project closeout activities remain and are taking longer than originally anticipated.This Amendment No.3 increases the payment limit and extends the contract term which is necessary for continuation of construction management services. Government Code Section 31000 and 4525 authorizes the County to contract for services including the type of construction management that PreScience Corporation provides. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without Board of Supervisors’approval,this Consulting Services Agreement will not be in effect.A delay in the completion of the Project will occur.Project delay may also result in substantial additional project costs and jeopardize the funding. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0587 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a lease with Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (dba Kids at Work) to lease approximately 2,603 square feet in a County-owned building located at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, as requested by the Public Works Department, for a 10-year term beginning February 1, 2024, in exchange for rent in the amount of $800 per month and the continued operation of a childcare facility. (100% General Fund) Attachments:1. Kids At Work Lease - FInal Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE a Lease of County-owned Property to Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (dba Kids at Work). ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a lease with Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (dba Kids at Work)to lease approximately 2,603 square feet in a County- owned building located at 255 Glacier Drive,Martinez,as requested by the Public Works Department,for a 10- year term beginning February 1,2024,in exchange for rent in the amount of $800 per month and the continued operation of a childcare facility for the children of County employees. FISCAL IMPACT: Rent and occupancy costs are budgeted within the General Fund, Fund#100300. There is no negative impact on the General Fund. The lease permits the County to receive rent from this property . BACKGROUND: Kids At Work Early Childhood Center is a non-profit corporation that provides low-cost quality childcare for any Contra Costa County employee,as well as other public sector employees within the county,provided space is available,in the County-owned building located at 255 Glacier Drive in Martinez,known as the Public Works Department campus, for more than 20 years. Kids At Work provides infant care (less than 1-year old),toddler care (ages 1 year to 3.5 years)and Pre-school CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0587,Version:1 Kids At Work provides infant care (less than 1-year old),toddler care (ages 1 year to 3.5 years)and Pre-school (pre-kindergarten)care and teaching for children.Each phase of the Kids At Work curriculum is designed to provide a caring and teaching environment for the children of county employees,preparing them for kindergarten and beyond.Kids At Work meets and exceeds all applicable licensing regulations and standards. These standards relate to the County’s facilities,staff,health and safety procedures,nutrition,teacher/child ratios,and recordkeeping.The school is subject to inspection by the state,county,city,health,fire,and licensing officials.Therefore,county employees know their children are being cared for and educated within an environment that can provide them with peace of mind and confidence so they can continue to serve the residents of Contra Costa County. Providing this Childcare Care space on the Public Works campus has proven to be not only an investment in our children, but also a benefit to all County employees by providing this option. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the lease is not approved, the operation of the childcare facility at this location will be in jeopardy. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 LEASE Kids At Work 255 Glacier Dr. Building 500 Martinez, California This lease is dated February 1, 2024, and is between the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California (“County”), and Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (DBA Kids At Work), a California nonprofit corporation (“Lessee”). Recitals A. The County owns the property located at 255 Glacier Drive in Martinez, California (the “Property”). The Property is improved with two buildings, the main building, which is the building shown on Exhibit A with a reddish tan roof, and a building known as “Building 500.” Building 500 consists of approximately 11,921 square feet and is the building shown on Exhibit A with the blue roof. Both buildings are used by the County’s Public Works Department. B. The County desires to lease to Lessee that portion of Building 500 consisting of approximately 2,603 square feet that is outlined in red on Exhibit A (the “Premises”). C. The County and Lessee desire that the Premises be used for as a childcare facility for the children of County employees. The parties therefore agree as follows: Agreement 1. Lease of Premises. Subject to the terms set forth in this lease, the County hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from the County, the Premises. 2. Term. The “Term” of this lease is 10 years, commencing February 1, 2024, and continuing through January 31, 2034. 3. Consideration. As consideration for this lease, Lessee shall (i) pay monthly rent in the amount of $800 on or before the first day of each month, and (ii) use the Premises to operate a childcare facility for children of County employees. a. Rent for any partial month will be prorated at the rate of 1/30th of the applicable monthly rent per day. b. The childcare facility is to be operated between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on days that County offices are closed. 2 4. Additional Payment Terms. a. Late Rental Payments: In the event Lessee fails to pay County any amount due under this lease within five days after such amount is due, Lessee shall pay to County a late charge of $100 per occurrence (the “Late Charge”), plus interest on the unpaid balance at a rate of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month, from the date the pay- ment was due and payable until paid in full. Lessee shall pay all Late Charges as additional rent on or before the date the next installment of rent is due. County and Lessee hereby agree that it is and will be extremely difficult to ascertain and fix County’s actual damage from any late payments and, thus, that Lessee shall pay as liquidated damages to County the Late Charge specified in this Section, which is the result of the parties’ reasonable endeavor to estimate fair average compensation for the late payment (other than attorneys’ fees and costs). County’s acceptance of the Late Charge as liquidated damages does not constitute a waiver of Lessee’s default with respect to the overdue amount or prevent County from exercising any of the rights and remedies available to County under this lease. b. Form and Place of Payment: Lessee shall pay all rents and fees in cash or by personal check, certified check, or money order, payable to the County of Contra Costa, by delivering same on or before due date to Contra Costa County, Public Works Department – Real Estate Division, 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, California 94553, or at such other place as the County may designate from time to time. c. Returned Checks: If a check written by Lessee is returned for insufficient funds, the County may impose a reasonable service charge in addition to any Late Charge and in addition to any charges imposed by the bank. County may require Lessee to pay rent by certified check or money order if Lessee’s bank or banks have returned one or more personal checks within the preceding 12-month period. 5. Use. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Premises may be used by Lessee only for the purpose of providing childcare services to the children of County employees. Lessee may not use the Premises for any other purpose without the prior written consent of the County. Any use of the Premises other than as described in this Section without the County’s prior written consent is a default of this lease. 6. Obligation to Pay Utilities/Services. a. The County shall contract and pay utility providers directly for all utilities used or consumed on the Premises, including, but not limited to gas, water, electricity, storm and sanitary sewer services, landscaping, telephone services, and garbage disposal. b. Lessee shall pay for any services necessary to provide the services intended, including but not limited to telephone, custodial/janitorial services, hazardous materials disposal, and linen services provided to the Premises. 3 7. Condition of Premises. Lessee is leasing the Premises in an “as is” physical condition with no warranty, express or implied, on the part of the County as to the condition of the Premises. 8. Maintenance and Repairs. a. Roof and Exterior of Premises. County shall keep the roof and exterior of the Premises in good order, condition, and repair, and shall maintain the structural integrity of the Building, including the exterior doors and their fixtures, closers and hinges, exterior windows, glass and glazing, and all locks and key systems used in the Premises. b. Interior of Premises. Lessee shall keep and maintain the interior of the Premises in good order, condition and repair, but County shall repair damage to the interior caused by its failure to maintain the exterior in good repair, including damage to the interior caused by roof leaks and/or interior and exterior wall leaks. Lessee may install and maintain an alarm system, if deemed necessary by Lessee. c. Utility Systems. County shall repair and maintain the electrical, lighting, water and plumbing systems in good order, condition, and repair. d. HVAC. County shall maintain and repair the heating, ventilating, and air- conditioning (HVAC) systems. e. Parking; Exterior Lighting; Landscaping. County shall maintain the parking lot, exterior lighting system, and landscaping in good order, condition, and repair. f. Life Safety. County shall maintain, in compliance with government codes and standards, the fire life safety system. When needed, County shall repair and/or replace such systems. g. Covenant against Liens. Lessee may not permit any mechanic’s, materialman’s, or other lien against the Premises, or the property of which the Premises forms a part, in connection with any labor, materials, or services furnished or claimed to have been furnished. If any such lien is filed against the Premises, or property of which the Premises forms a part, Lessee will cause the same to be discharged, provided however, Lessee may contest any such lien, so long as the enforcement thereof is stayed. 9. Taxes. Lessee agrees to pay before delinquency all taxes (including, but not limited to, possessory interest tax), assessments, license fees, and other charges that are levied and assessed upon Lessee’s interest in the Premises, or upon Lessee’s personal property installed or located in or on the Premises, by Contra Costa County or other legally authorized government authority. Lessee may pay any taxes and assessments under protest, without liability, cost or expense to the Lessor, to contest the amount in good faith. 4 Payment of taxes, assessments, license fees, or other charges levied and assessed upon Lessee’s interest, (i) does not reduce the rent due to the County under this lease, and (ii) is the liability of Lessee. 10. Quiet Enjoyment. Provided Lessee complies with the terms of this lease, the County covenants that Lessee will peaceably and quietly have, hold, and enjoy the Premises during the Term. 11. Assignment and Sublease. Lessee may not assign this lease or sublease the Premises or any part thereof at any time during the Term. 12. Alterations and Additions. Lessee may not make any alterations, erect any additional structures, or make any improvements on the Premises without the prior written consent of the Director of Public Works or his or her designee. In the event Lessee makes alterations or constructs additions that violate the conditions contained in this lease (an “Unauthorized Addition”), at the County’s sole discretion, Lessee shall remove any Unauthorized Addition at Lessee’s sole cost and expense. If Lessee is required to remove any Unauthorized Addition, Lessee, at its sole cost and expense, shall restore the Premises to the conditions existing immediately prior to the existence of the Unauthorized Addition, or such other condition designated by the County in its election. If Lessee is not required to remove any Unauthorized Addition, such Unauthorized Additions shall remain on and be surrendered with the Premises on expiration or termination of this lease. If Lessee wishes to make any alterations, erect any additional structures, or make any additional improvements to the Premises as provided in this Section, Lessee may not commence construction until Lessee has the prior written consent of the County. In addition, a Notice of Lessor Non-Responsibility must be posted and recorded by Lessee during construction in accordance with Civil Code section 8444. Lessee shall mail a copy of the Notice of Lessor Non-Responsibility to Lessor upon filing it with the County Recorder. 13. Insurance. a. Liability Insurance. Throughout the Term, Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect, at its sole expense, a comprehensive general liability or commercial general liability insurance program covering bodily injury (including death), personal injury, and property damage. The limits must be not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate. The policy must name the County, its officers, agents and employees, individually and collectively, as additional insureds. The liability insurance maintained by Lessee must be primary. b. Property Insurance. The County will maintain property insurance coverage on its real property. Lessee has no interest in the proceeds of insurance on the County’s real property, improvements, equipment, or fixtures. Lessee shall sign all documents 5 necessary or proper in connection with the settlement of any claim or loss by the County. Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect, at its sole expense, a standard All Risk policy, which may exclude earthquake and flood, to insure its own personal property, contents, improvements and betterments within or on the Premises. The coverage must be for not less than 90% of the actual cash value of the personal property. Lessee shall name the County as an additional insured and loss payee with respect to the improvements and betterments. c. Worker’s Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance. Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect, at its sole expense, (i) statutory California Workers’ Compensation coverage including a broad form all-states endorsement, and (ii) employer’s liability coverage for not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for all employees engaged in services or operations at the Premises. d. Evidence of Insurance. Within 30 days of execution of this lease, Lessee shall provide to the County, on a form approved by the County, an original copy of a certificate of insurance. The certificate of insurance must certify that the coverage required by this lease has been obtained and remains in force for the period required by this lease. e. Notice of Cancellation or Reduction of Coverage. Lessee shall cause all policies it is required to obtain under the terms of this lease to contain a provision that the County is to receive written notification of any cancellation or reduction in coverage at least 30 days prior to the effective date of such cancellation or reduction. Any such notification is to be sent to the County in accordance with Section 22 - Notices. f. Waiver of Subrogation. Except as may be specifically provided elsewhere in this lease, the County and Lessee hereby each mutually waive any and all rights of recovery from the other in the event of damage to the Premises or any personal property that is caused by acts of God, perils of fire, lightning, and the extended coverage perils, as defined in insurance policies and forms approved for use in the State of California. Each party shall obtain any special endorsements, if required by their insurer, to evidence compliance with this waiver. 14. Surrender of Premises. On the last day of the Term, or sooner termination of this lease, Lessee shall peaceably and quietly leave and surrender to the County the Premises, along with their appurtenances and fixtures, all in good condition, ordinary wear and tear, damage by casualty, acts of God and circumstances over which Lessee has no control excepted. 15. Abandonment. Lessee may not vacate or abandon the Premises at any time during the Term. If Lessee abandons, vacates, or surrenders the Premises, or is dispossessed by process of law, or otherwise, the County may deem any personal property belonging to Lessee that remains on the Premises to be abandoned. 6 16. Waste, Nuisance. Lessee may not commit, or suffer to be committed, any waste upon the Premises, or any nuisance or other act or thing that may disturb the quiet enjoyment of any other occupant of the neighborhood in which the Premises is located. 17. Inspection. The County may enter the Premises at any time in an emergency and with 24 hours prior notice in a non-emergency to determine that (i) the Premises is being reasonably cared for, (ii) no waste is being made and that all actions affecting the Premises are done in the manner best calculated to preserve the Premises, and (iii) Lessee is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this lease. 18. Destruction. If damage occurs that causes a partial destruction of the Premises during the Term from any cause, the County may, at its option, make repairs within a reasonable time. Partial destruction does not void this lease, except that Lessee is entitled to a proportionate reduction in rent while such repairs are being made. The proportionate reduction in rent is to be calculated by multiplying rent by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of square feet that are unusable by Lessee and the denominator of which is the total number of square feet in the Premises. If the County does not elect to make repairs, this lease may be terminated by either party, without cost, obligation or liability to the other party, except as described herein. This lease will terminate in the event of a total destruction of the Premises. 19. Indemnification. Lessee shall indemnify, defend and hold County, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all claims, costs and liability, for any damage, injury or death, including without limitation, all consequential damages from any cause whatsoever, to any person or the property of any person arising directly or indirectly from or connected with this lease, Lessee’s operations, or Lessee’s use or possession of the Premises, save and except claims or litigation arising through the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of County, its officers or employees, and shall make good to and reimburse County for any expenditures, including reasonable attorneys fees, County may make by reason of such matters. 20. Default. The occurrence of any of the following events is a default under this lease: a. Lessee. i. Lessee’s failure to pay rent within five business days after the due date. ii. Lessee’s failure to comply with any other material term or provision of this lease if such failure is not remedied within 30 days after receipt of a written notice from the County to Lessee specifying the nature of the breach in reasonably sufficient detail (a “Notice of Default”). If the required cure of the noticed failure cannot be completed within 30 days, the failure to cure will 7 not be deemed to be a default of this lease if Lessee has attempted to cure the failure within the 30-day period and has diligently and continuously attempted to complete the cure as soon as reasonably possible. In no event will the cure period extend beyond the 60-day period after Lessee’s receipt of the Notice of Default. b. The County. The County’s failure to perform any obligation under this lease if the failure is not remedied within 30 days after receipt of a written notice from Lessee to the County specifying the nature of the breach in reasonably sufficient detail. If the required cure of the noticed failure cannot reasonably be completed within 30 days, a default will not be deemed to occur if the County has attempted to cure the failure within the 30-day period and has diligently and continuously attempted to complete the cure as soon as reasonably possible. 21. Remedies. a. County. Upon the occurrence of a default by Lessee, the County may reenter and repossess the Premises and remove all persons and property from the Premises, after giving Lessee written Notice of Default and in accordance with due process of law. b. Lessee. Upon the occurrence of a default by the County, Lessee may (i) terminate this lease by giving written notice to the County and quit the Premises without further cost or obligation to the County. 22. Notices. Any notice required or permitted under this lease shall be in writing and sent by overnight delivery service or registered or certified mail, postage prepaid and directed as follows: To Lessee: Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center Attn: School Director 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 To County: Contra Costa County Public Works Department Attn: Principal Real Property Agent 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 Either party may at any time designate in writing a substitute address for that set forth above and thereafter notices are to be directed to the substituted address. If sent in accordance with this Section, all notices will be deemed effective (i) the next business day, if sent by overnight courier, or (ii) three days after being deposited in the United States Postal system. 8 23. Successors and Assigns. This lease binds and inures to the benefit of the heirs, successors, and assigns of the County and Lessee. 24. Holding Over. In the event Lessee remains in possession of the Premises after the expiration of the Term, such holding over does not constitute a renewal or extension of this lease, but will be construed to be a tenancy from month to month on the same terms and conditions set forth in this lease, except that the monthly rent due and payable hereunder will be 125% of the rent payable as of the last month of the Term. 25. Time is of the Essence. In fulfilling all terms and conditions of this lease, time is of the essence. 26. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California govern all matters arising out of this lease. 27. Severability. In the event that any provision in this lease is held to be invalid or unenforceable in any respect, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this lease will not in any way be affected or impaired. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] 9 28. Entire Agreement; Construction; Modification. Neither party has relied on any promise or representation not contained in this lease. All previous conversations, negotiations, and understandings are of no further force or effect. This lease is not to be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the parties, but rather as if both parties prepared it. This lease may be modified only by a writing signed by both parties. The parties are executing this lease on the date set forth in the introductory paragraph. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood political subdivision of the State of Center, a California nonprofit corporation California By: _______________________ By: _______________________ Warren Lai Tamra Melgoza Director of Public Works Chief Executive Officer By: _______________________ Carolyn Halstenson Secretary RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By: _______________________ Jessica L. Dillingham Principal Real Property Agent By: _________________________ Julin E. Perez Supervising Real Property Agent APPROVED AS TO FORM THOMAS L. GEIGER, COUNTY COUNSEL By: _______________________ Kathleen M. Andrus Deputy County Counsel WLP487 \\PW-DATA\grpdata\realprop\LEASE MANAGEMENT\MARTINEZ\255 GLACIER DR (MULTI BLDGS) - T00038\500 GLACIER DR - Kids At Work\Kids At Work Lease - final.doc 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0588 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with DRT Grading & Paving, Inc., to extend the term through January 31, 2025, with no change to the payment limit or remaining terms, for on-call pavement maintenance and repair services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. (No Fiscal Impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Amendment No. 1 with DRT Grading & Paving Inc. a California Corporation, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute Contract Amendment with DRT Grading &Paving,Inc.,effective January 31,2024,to extend the term from January 31,2024 to January 31,2025,with no change to the payment limit,for on-call pavement maintenance and repair services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: Facilities Maintenance Budget. (100% General Fund) BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department,Facilities Services is responsible for maintenance and repairs of all County properties.Work done under this contract consists of paving and concrete work to County properties in support of facilities maintenance.Work may include pavement repairs and replacement,skin patching, sidewalk repairs, concrete flatwork, and hot mix asphalt paving. Originally bid on BidSync #2009-423,DRT Grading &Paving,Inc.,was one of three lowest,responsive,and responsible vendors awarded for this work.On January 5,2021,the Board approved a contract with DRT Grading & Paving, Inc. in the amount of $750,000 with the term February 1, 2021 through January 31, 2024. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0588,Version:1 Government Code Section 25358 authorizes the County to contract for maintenance and upkeep of County facilities. Facilities Services is requesting Amendment No.1 to be approved extending the term from January 31,2024 to January 31, 2025 for on-call pavement maintenance and repair services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval of this Contract Amendment No. 1, pavement maintenance and repair services with DRT Grading &Paving,Inc.will discontinue and current projects underway will not be completed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0592 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Bay Point and Saranap areas. (100% State Department of Transportation Grant Funds) Attachments:1. CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and take related actions under CEQA ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project (Project)and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise the Project,Bay Point and Saranap areas.[County Project No. WO7079, DCD-CP#23-37] (Districts V, II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 2(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $2,100,000. 100% State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Grant Funds. BACKGROUND: The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0),which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025.The project will install two subsurface trash capture devices,certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),one in Bay Point and one in Saranap,which will help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0592,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project may result in a delay of design,construction,funding,and compliance with the SWRCB mandate. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0590 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to submit three grant applications to the US Department of Transportation Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity grant program for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 for the Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Project, Boulevard Way Complete Streets Study, and Bay Point Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Study, Saranap and Bay Point areas. (80% Federal Funds and 20% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Grant applications for the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) grant program for Fiscal Year 2023/2024, Saranap and Bay Point areas. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit three grant applications to the United States Department of Transportation (DOT)Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE)grant program for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 for the Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Project,Boulevard Way Complete Streets Study,and Bay Point Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Study, Saranap and Bay Point areas. (Districts II and V) FISCAL IMPACT: 80% Federal Funds and 20% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: On November 30,2023,the DOT issued the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)for the RAISE grant program under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (also referred to as the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law”or “BIL”).In the notice,the DOT solicits applications for surface transportation projects that will have a significant local or regional impact that advance safety,equity,climate and sustainability,workforce development, job quality, and wealth creation. Applications must be submitted by February 28, 2024. The DOT has authorized and appropriated $1.5 billion to be awarded annually as part of the RAISE program. The grant program categorizes applications as either:(a)planning grants for pre-construction activities;or (b) capital grants for projects that include construction activities.The County intends to apply for three planning CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0590,Version:1 grants, the allowable maximum, for this cycle of the RAISE program. The DOT will evaluate applications based on eight merit criteria:(1)safety;(2)environmental sustainability; (3)quality of life;(4)mobility and community connectivity;(5)economic competitiveness and opportunity;(6) state of good repair; (7) partnership and collaboration; and (8) innovation. RECOMMENDED CANDIDATE PROJECTS: Public Works staff recommends submitting grant applications for the following projects summarized below: 1.Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Project (District 2) This project is to complete further design of improvements proposed in the 2015 Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study.The scope of the design work is Olympic Boulevard from Interstate 680 to Pleasant Hill Road and improvements include new and widened sidewalks plus Class II bikeways. 2.Boulevard Way Complete Streets Study (District 2) This project will evaluate the feasibility of implementing a road diet on Boulevard Way from Interstate 680 to Saranap Avenue and constructing a pedestrian path from Kinney Drive to Olympic Boulevard. The feasibility study will focus on safety and traffic calming measures as well as active transportation enhancements and will include public outreach to support the design of future improvements. 3.Bay Point Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Study (District 5) This project will evaluate the feasibility of implementing enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including Class IV bicycle facilities and green infrastructure,in Bay Point,specifically on:1)McAvoy Road,starting at McAvoy Harbor and the Bay Point Regional Shoreline,across railroad tracks to Port Chicago Highway,2)along Port Chicago Highway to Willow Pass Road,and 3)Willow Pass Road from the Evora Road-westbound State Route 4 ramps intersection to the border with the City of Pittsburg. If authorized to proceed,staff will finalize and submit the grant applications for both projects by February 28, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Public Works Department is not authorized to submit the application,grant funding will not be available, which will delay the design and construction of these projects. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0591 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE correction to the Board’s January 9, 2024 approval (Item C.113) of a job order contract with The Gordian Group, Inc., (dba The Mellon Group), to correct contract provisions related to the consultant’s licensed software, and to refer to the correct contract term from March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2027, with an optional extension through February 28, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director. (100% Various Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Clarify Staff Report # 24-0114 with The Gordian Group, Inc. for Job Order Contracting Program Development and Implementation Services ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE clarification of Board action of January 9, 2024 with The Gordian Group, Inc., dba The Mellon Group (Gordian), to correct contract provisions related to Consultant’s license agreement and to modify the approved contract term from the period from January 9, 2024 through January 8, 2027, which may be extended to January 8, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director to the period from March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027, which may be extended to February 28, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no upfront costs to develop the job order contracting program. Gordian charges fees totaling 5% if and when a job order is issued to a job order contractor, based on the value of the work. BACKGROUND: Job Order Contracting (JOC) has become a crucial project delivery tool that allows Public Works to complete projects more quickly using fewer project management resources. JOC programs rely upon a Job Order Contracting Program Development and Implementation consultant and the consultant’s proprietary software and implementation solutions. On January 9, 2024, the Board of Supervisors approved staff report # 24-0114 authorizing execution of a CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0591,Version:1 contract with Gordian in an amount not to exceed $1,750,000, to provide Job Order Contracting Program development and implementation services for various County projects for the period from January 9, 2024 through January 8, 2027, which may be extended to January 8, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director. The purpose of this staff report is twofold: (a) to clarify contract provisions related to Consultant’s license agreement so that the provisions are in keeping with Consultant’s latest proprietary software and implementation solutions, and (b) to modify the contract term slightly to better coordinate with the transition from the County’s expiring JOC Program Development and Implementation Services contract to this new contract. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the modifications to contract provisions related to Consultant’s license agreement are not approved, the County will not be able to utilize Consultant’s currently offered proprietary software and implementation solutions, and the County would be unable to execute a contract with the Gordian. Consequently, the County’s JOC program would lapse. Without this procurement option, the County does not have the resources to complete all of its capital improvement projects now or in the foreseeable future. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0592 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Bay Point and Saranap areas. (100% State Department of Transportation Grant Funds) Attachments:1. CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and take related actions under CEQA ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project (Project)and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise the Project,Bay Point and Saranap areas.[County Project No. WO7079, DCD-CP#23-37] (Districts V, II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 2(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $2,100,000. 100% State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Grant Funds. BACKGROUND: The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0),which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025.The project will install two subsurface trash capture devices,certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),one in Bay Point and one in Saranap,which will help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0592,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project may result in a delay of design,construction,funding,and compliance with the SWRCB mandate. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0592 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Bay Point and Saranap areas. (100% State Department of Transportation Grant Funds) Attachments:1. CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and take related actions under CEQA ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project (Project)and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise the Project,Bay Point and Saranap areas.[County Project No. WO7079, DCD-CP#23-37] (Districts V, II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 2(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $2,100,000. 100% State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Grant Funds. BACKGROUND: The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0),which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025.The project will install two subsurface trash capture devices,certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),one in Bay Point and one in Saranap,which will help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0592,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project may result in a delay of design,construction,funding,and compliance with the SWRCB mandate. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0593 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/3/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work, for routine maintenance and repair of existing road pavement, Countywide. (100% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work, Countywide ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work,for routine maintenance and repair of existing road pavement, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work to provide supplemental grinding services,as needed,to the Public Works Maintenance crews for the removal of damaged asphalt concrete in support of pavement maintenance operations in various locations throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one $200,000 contract,but not more than two $200,000 contracts to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two one- year extensions and will be used as needed with no minimum amount that has to be spent. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0593,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0594 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s) for various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work, for routine maintenance and repair of concrete structures within road and flood control right-of-way, Countywide. (100% Local Road and Flood Control Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise for the 2024 On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s) for Various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s)for Various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work,for routine maintenance and repair of concrete structures within road and Flood Control right-of-way, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road and Flood Control Funds BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s)for Various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work to provide supplemental services,as needed,to the Public Works Maintenance crews for routine road and flood control maintenance and repairs in various locations throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one $150,000 contract,but not more than three $150,000 contracts to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two one-year extensions and will be used, as needed, with no minimum amount that has to be spent. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road and flood control maintenance work in a CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0594,Version:1 The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road and flood control maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0595 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/10/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work for routine maintenance of existing road pavement, Countywide. (100% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise the 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work for routine maintenance of existing road pavement, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work to provide supplemental sweeping services,as needed,to Public Works Maintenance crews for routine road maintenance and repairs in various locations within Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one (1)$600,000 contract,but not more than four (4) $600,000 contracts,to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two (2) one-year extensions, and will be used, as needed, without a minimum amount that has to be spent. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0595,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not awarded,the Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0596 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s) for various Road Maintenance, Flood Control, and Facilities Maintenance Work to provide fencing services including, but not limited to, installation, repair, replacement, or removal of fences and gates. (100% Local Road, Flood Control, Airport, Special Revenue, and General Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise for the 2024 On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance, Flood Control, and Facilities Maintenance Work, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance,Flood Control,and Facilities Maintenance Work to provide fencing services including, but not limited to, installation, repair, replacement, or removal of fences and gates. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road, Flood Control, and General Funds. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance,Flood Control,and Facilities Maintenance Work to provide supplemental services,as needed,to the Public Works maintenance crews for routine road,flood control,and facilities maintenance and repairs in various locations throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one (1)$400,000 contract,but not more than four (4) $400,000 contracts to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two one-year extensions and will be used, as needed, with no minimum amount that has to be spent. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road,flood control,and/or facilities CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0596,Version:1 The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road,flood control,and/or facilities maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0597 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/30/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ACCEPT the 2023 Semi-Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisition Acceptances dated July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023, approved by the Public Works Director as submitted, Discovery Bay and San Pablo areas. (100% Various Roads and Flood Control Funds) Attachments:1. 7-1-23 - 12-31-23 Report Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:ACCEPT the 2023 Semi-Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisition Acceptances dated July 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the 2023 Semi-Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisition Acceptances dated July 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023, approved by the Public Works Director for the acquisitions of any interest in real property where the purchase price for the real property interest did not exceed $100,000 in Discovery Bay and San Pablo Areas. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% various road and flood control funds covered costs related to staff time and purchase price. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the Contra Costa County, Ordinance Code 2019-35, Title 11, Division 1108, Chapter 1108-8.002, “The Board of Supervisors authorizes the Public Works Director, or his or her designated deputy, to perform all acts necessary to approve and accept for the County the acquisition of any interest in real property where the purchase price for the real property interest does not exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).” The Public Works Director shall submit a semi-annual report to the Board of Supervisors on each acquisition done pursuant to this section, including the interest acquired, its price, and the necessity for the purchase, which is described in the attached Semi-Annual Acceptance Report. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0597,Version:1 The Board of Supervisors would not be informed of the acquisitions accepted by the Public Works Director pursuant to Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Acceptance Report of Real Estate Acquisition July 1, 2023 - December 31, 2023 CERT. NO.AREA PROJECT/PURPOSE INTEREST PRICE 23-60 Discovery Bay Bixler & Regatta Rd. Intersection Improvement Project Roadway Easement N/A 23-63 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2407 Tara Hills Dr.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-64 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2505 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-65 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2511 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-66 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2517 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-67 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2585 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-68 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2560 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-69 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2540 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-70 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2550 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-71 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2560 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A G:\realprop\BOARD ORDERS-STAFF REPORTS\2024\02-27-2024 Real Estate Acceptances\7-1-23 - 12-31-23 Report Acceptance Report of Real Estate Acquisition July 1, 2023 - December 31, 2023 CERT. NO.AREA PROJECT/PURPOSE INTEREST PRICE 23-72 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2570 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-73 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2578 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-74 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2588 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-75 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2664 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-76 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2673 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A G:\realprop\BOARD ORDERS-STAFF REPORTS\2024\02-27-2024 Real Estate Acceptances\7-1-23 - 12-31-23 Report 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-48 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RESCIND Resolution No. 2024-21 adopted on January 16, 2024 (C.92) and ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-48 granting a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305 for pipelines located in the unincorporated area of the County near Pacheco, Clayton, and Byron, as recommended by the Public Works Director. (100% Pipeline Franchise Fees) Attachments:1. Exhibit 1 Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Granting of a Pipeline Franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RESCIND Resolution No. 2024-21 adopted on January 16, 2024 (C.92) and ADOPT Resolution granting a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305 for pipelines located in the unincorporated area of the County near Pacheco, Clayton, and Byron, as recommended by the Public Works Director. FISCAL IMPACT: The pipeline franchise will generate approximately $14,500 per year commencing with calendar year 2023. The annual franchise payment will be calculated at the rate of $1.77 per cubic foot of pipeline within the County right-of-way. The number of cubic feet of pipeline subject to the franchise fee rate will be calculated by taking the area of the inside diameter of the pipeline plus 1” and multiplying it by the length of the pipeline within the County right-of-way. The annual franchise fee rate of $1.77 per cubic foot is increased annually by the change in the Consumer Price Index, all Urban Consumers for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Area (1982-84 = 100), with December 2012 (239.53) as the base CPI month. BACKGROUND: On January 16, 2024, this Board approved Resolution No. 2024-21 which granted a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC. The staff report and Resolution No. 2024-21 incorrectly listed the Vine Hill Crude Oil Pipeline as a nitrogen line instead of a crude oil pipeline. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-48,Version:1 On August 13, 2013, this Board adopted Ordinance No. 2013-19 (establishing regulations for granting pipeline franchises in County rights-of-way) and Resolution No. 2013/305 (establishing pipeline franchise fee amounts). The 10” Vine Hill Crude pipeline described in the table below was previously covered under an existing County pipeline franchise granted to Equilon Enterprises LLC through the adoption of Resolution No. 2016/619. The 20” Coalinga Avon pipeline described in the table below was previously covered under an existing County pipeline franchise granted to San Pablo Bay Pipeline Company LLC through the adoption of Resolution No. 2016/623. Effective March 1, 2020, Crimson Pipeline, LLC has acquired these two pipelines. Crimson Pipeline, LLC has filed written documentation with the County, wherein it has requested the granting of the new pipeline franchise for the transportation of crude oil pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305. Crimson Pipeline, LLC also provided a $5,000 deposit to cover all administrative costs associated with the granting of this pipeline franchise as required by Ordinance No. 2013-19 and Resolution No. 2013/305. Approval of Resolution No. 2024-___ will grant a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC for the pipelines shown in the table below for an initial term of 10 years. Pipeline Name Type Diameter Length Vine Hill Crude Crude Oil 10"3,439 ft Coalinga Avon Crude Oil 20"1,409 ft CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Crimson Pipeline, LLC will have a franchise with Contra Costa County that includes inaccurate pipeline information. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-48,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF a resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa authorizing the granting of a Pipeline Franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa finds and declares: WHEREAS, on August 13, 2013, this Board adopted: Ordinance No. 2013-19 (establishing regulations for granting pipeline franchises in County rights-of-way), which became effective September 12, 2013; and Resolution No. 2013/305 (establishing pipeline franchise fee amounts). WHEREAS, Crimson Pipeline, LLC has filed a written application with the County, wherein it has requested the granting of a pipeline franchise pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305. WHEREAS, Crimson Pipeline, LLC has identified the following two pipelines, which it owns and will be covered under the proposed pipeline franchise as: 1.Vine Hill Pipeline - 10-inch diameter, 3,439 feet crude oil. 2.Coalinga Avon Pipeline - 20-inch diameter, 1,409 feet crude oil. WHEREAS, the crude oil pipelines to be covered under the pipeline franchise were covered under existing County pipeline franchises. WHEREAS, the County has reviewed the application as well as relevant documents, staff reports, and recommendation and it is the intent of the Board to grant a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline LLC pursuant to Ordinance 2013-19 and Resolution 2013/305. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1.The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County finds and declares that the foregoing recitals are true and correct. 2.Pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013-19, a franchise to operate a 10-inch diameter crude oil pipeline bisecting the County from east to west and crossing various County rights of way for a lineal distance of approximately 3,439 feet (Vine Hill Pipeline) is hereby granted to Crimson Pipeline, LLC, for a term of 10 years. 3.Pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013-19, a franchise to operate a 20-inch diameter crude oil pipeline bisecting the County from north to south and crossing various County rights of way for a lineal distance of approximately 1,409 feet (Coalinga Avon Pipeline) is hereby granted to Crimson Pipeline, LLC, for a term of 10 years. 4.The general location of the pipelines is depicted on the maps attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 5.The annual franchise payment to be paid pursuant to County Resolution 2013/305 shall be calculated at the rate of $1.77 per cubic foot of pipeline within the County right-of-way. The number of cubic feet of pipeline CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-48,Version:1 subject to the franchise fee rate will be calculated by taking the area of the inside diameter of the pipeline plus 1” and multiplying it by the length of the line within the County right-of-way. The annual franchise fee rate of $1.77 per cubic foot is increased annually by the change in the Consumer Price Index, all Urban Consumers for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Area (1982-84 = 100), with December 2012 (239.53) as the base CPI month. 6.The Director of Public Works, or his designee, is authorized to administer the pipeline franchise granted pursuant to this resolution. 7.The Resolution shall take effect upon the following: Within 30 days of the date of this Resolution, Crimson Pipeline, LLC must file with the Public Works Department the following: (1) a written acceptance of the terms and conditions of the franchise granted pursuant to this Resolution, Ordinance No. 2013-19, and Resolution No. 2013/305; (2) a performance bond in the form approved by the Board; and, (3) insurance coverage as required by Ordinance 2013-19..end CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ 88' Across Marsh Creek Rd within County ROW 954' Across Marsh Creek Rd within County ROWMARSH C R E E K R DPINE LNRUSSELMANN PARK ROADLegend Parcel Lines Coalinga to Avon 20" Pipeline Sheet 1 of 2 Exhibit 1 Crimson Pipeline LLC 20" Pipeline - Contra Costa County ROW Crossing Locations Exhibit 1 APN: 005-180-007 APN: 005-170-006 APN: 005-170-012 Vasco Rd APN: 078-320-003 APN: 078-320-003 APN: 080-050-003 Marsh Creek RdSheet 2 of 2 262' Across Vasco Rd within County ROW 105' Across Marsh Creek Rd within County ROW Legend Parcel Lines Coalinga to Avon 20" Pipeline Exhibit 1 Crimson Pipeline LLC 20" Pipeline - Contra Costa County ROW Crossing Locations 3,439' Along Pacheco Blvd in County ROW Pache c o B l v d Via E s t r e l l a Camino del SolGoree CtAdelaide DrSodaro DrMacmurtry DrDe Normandie WayWindhover WayKaren LnVia de FloresEllis R dCormorant CtGiannini RdKennedy Way Corte CleloLegend Parcel Lines 10" Vine Hill Crude Pipeline Crimson Pipeline LLC 10" Pipeline - Contra Costa County ROW Crossing Locations Exhibit 1 Exhibit 1 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-49 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-49 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive, on March 7, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue, on March 7, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution No.approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive,on March 7,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department to maintain public safety.Pacific Gas and Electric Company is requesting to close a portion of Beloit Avenue for traffic safety due to the narrow roadway at the construction site. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-49,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive,on March 7,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-5 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to PG&E to fully close Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 7,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m.through 5:00 p.m.,subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the construction area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.PG&E shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District and the Kensington Fire Protection District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-49,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-50 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-50 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve and Authorize to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department.Pacific Gas &Electric Company is requesting a road closure to replace a utility pole.The construction team indicated that a road closure is necessary for the requested work to be done safely due to the narrow road. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-50,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF: Approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-6 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on April 3,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and Kensington Fire Department. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-51 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-51 for the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, Alamo area. (86% Alamo Area of Benefit Funds, 11% Transportation Development Act Funds, 3% Local Road Funds) Attachments:1. Attachment A to Resolution.pdf, 2. Attachment B to Resolution.pdf, 3. CP#24-04 NOE Miranda Ave TDA-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project and take related actions under CEQA, Alamo area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution to APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the total amount of $120,000 for the fiscal year 2024/2025 for the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project. APPROVE the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project,and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Alamo area. [County Project No. WO1025, DCD-CP#24-04] (District II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 1(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost:$1,070,000.(86%Alamo Area of Benefit (AOB)Funds,11%Transportation Development Act Funds, 3% Local Road Funds) BACKGROUND: Miranda Avenue is the primary road used by students,parents,and faculty traveling to Stone Valley Middle CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-51,Version:1 Miranda Avenue is the primary road used by students,parents,and faculty traveling to Stone Valley Middle School.Contra Costa County staff have coordinated with the school’s faculty who reported that students often travel along the existing unpaved shoulder throughout the school year.These students have been observed walking near motorists and bicyclists.The proposed improvements will provide a separate pathway that accommodates all pedestrian users in all-weather situations.This project will enhance safety and accessibility along the west side of Miranda Avenue,serving pedestrians and bicyclists between Stone Valley Road and Stone Valley Middle School.The improvements include the construction of a 5-foot-wide pedestrian pathway compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)at a length of approximately 1,650 feet.The existing bike lane adjacent to the pathway will be restored to a five-foot width. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If TDA funding is not obtained, the Project will not be constructed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-51,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)in the amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School; WHEREAS,Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA),Public Utilities Code (PUC)Section 99200 et seq.,authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS,the MTC,as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region,has adopted MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised,entitled “Transportation Development Act,Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,”which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS,MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single,countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS,Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide transportation planning agency,or county association of governments,as the case may be,of Contra Costa CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-51,Version:1 County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Attachment A to Resolution Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right of way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right of way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA Article 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document. 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. Attachment B to Resolution TDA Article 3 Project Application Form 1. Agency Contra Costa County Public Works Department 2. Primary Contact Joe Smithonic 3. Mailing Address 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 4. Email Address Joe.Smithonic@pw.cccounty.us 5. Phone Number (925) 313-2348 6. Secondary Contact (in the event primary is not available) Brian Louis 7. Mailing address (if different) N/A☒ 8. Email Address Brian.Louis@pw.cccounty.us 9. Phone Number (925) 313-2304 10. Send allocation instructions to (if different from above): 11. Project Title Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School 12. Amount requested $120,000 13. Fiscal Year of Claim 2024/2025 14. Description of Overall Project: 15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.) 16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below: Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only) 17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒ 18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒ This project will construct a new at-grade and all-weather pedestrian pathway and restore the existing bicycle lane on the west side of Miranda Avenue between Stone Valley Middle School and Stone Valley Road. Engineering and Construction costs. A map of the project location is attached. 19. Project Budget and Schedule Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year) Bike/Ped Plan - ENV 12,000 12,000 01/2024 PA&ED 12,000 12,000 06/2025 PS&E 20,000 27,000 47,000 12/2025 ROW 99,000 99,000 03/2026 CON 100,000 618,000 718,000 08/2026 Total Cost 120,000 768,000 888,000 Project Eligibility A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☒ No☐ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda. If "NO," provide an explanation). B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date: February 27, 2024 C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page) D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☒ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility? 2. If “NO” above, is the project exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☒ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate. F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): __________________ G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement. H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project? Yes☒ No☐ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the form may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets "\\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Miranda Ave Safe Routes to School (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Draft to DCD\CP#24- 04 NOE Miranda Ave TDA.docx" Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-04 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Izaac Tompkins, (925) 313-2176 Project Location: Miranda Avenue between Stone Valley Road and Stone Valley Middle School in unincorporated Alamo, Contra Costa County Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The purpose of the project is to enhance safety and accessibility along the west side of Miranda Avenue, serving pedestrians and bicyclists between Stone Valley Road and Stone Valley Middle School. The improvements include the construction of a 5-foot-wide pedestrian pathway compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) at a length of approximately 1,650 feet. The existing bike lane adjacent to the pathway will be restored to a five-foot width. Ground disturbance is anticipated up to a depth of 18 inches for soil to be excavated and replaced with aggregate base to install the pedestrian path and restore the bicycle lane. Construction is anticipated to occur in 2026 and take approximately 30 days to complete. Construction will have no impact on school hours. General construction best management practices for water pollution control will be implemented such as storm drain inlet protection and sediment control at creek crossings will be implemented throughout the construction period. Up to three native oak trees within the County right-of-way are anticipated to be removed. Real property transactions, temporary traffic control, and vegetation trimming may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity involves the repair and minor alteration of existing public facilities with negligible or no expansion of existing use pursuant to Article 19, Section, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant January 23, 2024 Senior Planner "\\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Miranda Ave Safe Routes to School (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Draft to DCD\CP#24- 04 NOE Miranda Ave TDA.docx" Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Izaac Tompkins Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2176 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: SHEET OF DATE: DB: CB: PROJECT LOCATION ATTACHMENT 1: PROJECT LOCATION MAP Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School BL NOV 23 1 1 255 GLACIER DRIVE, MARTINEZ, CA 94553 PH: (925)313-2000 FAX: (925)313-2333 4 Bay Point JV 255 GLACIER D RIVE MARTINEZ, CALIFORN IA 94553 PH : (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333 PROJEC T VICINITY MAP - CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Miranda Avenue Sa fe Rou tes to School FEDERAL ID NO:DB: CB:DATE:BL NOV 2023 1 1Page of JS 0 500 1,000250Fe et ± Stone Valley Middle School < BEGIN P ROJECT MI RANDA AV E STONE VALLEY RDINTERS TATE 680EN D PR OJ ECT > Downt own Alamo I RON HORS E RE GI ONAL T RAI L Miranda AveRemove treeEnd projectConform to existingconcrete DrivewayMeganCourt Stone Valley Road Miranda AveFence encroaches R/W at creekFile Path G:\transeng\GRANTS\Transportation Development Act (TDA)\TDA 24-25\Applications\Miranda Ave\Miranda_2.dwt Plot Date:11/30/2023 4:30:39 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE:1" = 30'PRELIMINARY PLANMiranda Avenue Safe Routes to SchoolStone Valley Road to Stone Valley Middle School DRAWN BY: BL CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 2 OF 2 DATE: 11/30/2023MIRANDA_2.DWT CAD FILE:Match Sheet BottomMatch Sheet Top Match Sheet 1 Bottom Stone Valley Middle SchoolMiranda AveLas Quebradas Miranda CourtBegin projectBolla Acres Ditch Miranda Ave Bolla Ave Tributary to SanRamon CreekFile Path G:\transeng\GRANTS\Transportation Development Act (TDA)\TDA 24-25\Applications\Miranda Ave\Miranda_2.dwt Plot Date:11/30/2023 4:30:08 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE:1" = 30'PRELIMINARY PLANMiranda Avenue Safe Routes to SchoolStone Valley Road to Stone Valley Middle School DRAWN BY: BL CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 1 OF 2 DATE: 11/30/2023MIRANDA_2.DWT CAD FILE:5' (typ)Proposed pedestrian path at gradeLEGENDExisting fenceRestore existing bike laneExisting road centerlineExisting drainageExisting treeAsphalt bermMatch Sheet Bottom5' (typ)Match Sheet Top Match Sheet 2 Top 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-52 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-52 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue, on March 21, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of four utility poles, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue, on March 21, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue,on March 21,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of four utility poles, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department.Pacific Gas &Electric Company is requesting a road closure to replace four utility poles.The construction team indicated that a road closure is necessary for the requested work to be done safely due to the narrow road. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Patel, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-52,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue,on March 21,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of four utility poles, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-2 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 21,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and Kensington Fire Department. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-61 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-61 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, Discovery Bay area. (38% Transportation Development Act Funds, 62% Local Road Funds) Attachments:1. Attachment A to Resolution - Timber Point Crosswalks.pdf, 2. Attachment B to Resolution - Timber Point Crosswalks.pdf, 3. CP#24-02 NOE Timber Point Crosswalk TDA-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project and take related actions under CEQA, Discovery Bay area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution to APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the total amount of $120,000 for the fiscal year 2024/2025 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project. APPROVE the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project,and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee,to advertise the Project,Discovery Bay area.[County Project No.WO1025,DCD-CP#24-02] (District III) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 1(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development,or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $320,000. (38% Transportation Development Act Funds, 62% Local Road Funds) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-61,Version:1 BACKGROUND: This project will improve public safety for pedestrians and vehicles at the five pedestrian crosswalks in the community surrounding Timber Point Elementary School in Discovery Bay.Improvements will increase pedestrian visibility and ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).These improvements include installing rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs),electrical power boxes,and detectable warning surfaces at the crosswalk curb ramps,new crosswalk striping,and modifications to existing striping. Existing crosswalks will be upgraded to yellow continental style crosswalks. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If TDA funding is not obtained, the Project will not be constructed. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)in the total amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements. WHEREAS,Article 3 of the TDA,Public Utilities Code (PUC)Section 99200 et seq.,authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS,the MTC,as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region,has adopted MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised,entitled “Transportation Development Act,Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,”which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS,MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single,countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS,Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-61,Version:1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide transportation planning agency,or county association of governments,as the case may be,of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Resolution No. 2024/ Attachment A Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA A rticle 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document . 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. Resolution No. 2024/ IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in the total amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements. WHEREAS, Article 3 of the TDA, Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99200 et seq., authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS, the MTC, as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region, has adopted MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised, entitled “Transportation Development Act, Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,” which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS, MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single, countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS, Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code ; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments, and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency, countywide transportation planning agency, or county association of governments, as the case may be, of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. Contra Costa County adopted this resolution on February 27, 2024. AYES: NAYS: Certified to by (signature): TYPE NAME OF CERTIFYING INDIVIDUAL HERE Resolution No. 2024/ Attachment A Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA A rticle 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document . 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. Resolution No. 2024/ Page 1 of 2 Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form 1. Agency Contra Costa County Public Works Department 2. Primary Contact Joe Smithonic 3. Mailing Address 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 4. Email Address Joe.Smithonic@pw.cccounty.us 5. Phone Number 925-313-2348 6. Secondary Contact (in the event primary is not available) Deborah Preciado 7. Mailing address (if different) N/A☐ 8. Email Address Deborah.Preciado@pw.cccounty.us 9. Phone Number 925-313-2267 10. Send allocation instructions to (if different from above): 11. Project Title Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements 12. Amount requested $120,000 13. Fiscal Year of Claim 2024/2025 14. Description of Overall Project: 15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.) 16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below: Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only) 17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒ 18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒ Construct crosswalk improvements at five locations surrounding the Timber Point Elementary School community. Improvements include restriping crosswalks, installing RRFBs, signs, and ADA compliant detectable warning surfaces. Engineering and Construction costs. A map of the project location is attached. Resolution No. 2024/ Page 2 of 2 19. Project Budget and Schedule Project Eligibility A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☒ No☐ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda. December 12, 2023 If "NO," provide an explanation). B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date: February 27, 2024 C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page) D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☐ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? N/A E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility? 2. If “NO” above, is the project is exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☒ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate. F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): June 2026 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement. H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project ? Yes☒ No☐ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the form may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year) Bike/Ped Plan ENV 6,000 6,000 02/2024 PA&ED 12,000 12,000 01/2025 PS&E 40,000 7,000 47,000 09/2025 ROW CON 80,000 179,000 259,000 06/2026 Total Cost 120,000 204,000 324,000 \\pw-data\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Point of Timber Ave Crosswalk, DB (WO1025)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#24-02 NOE Timber Point Crosswalk TDA.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-02 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Shravan Sundaram, (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at five intersections: 1. Newport Drive and Cambridge Way, 2. Newport Drive and Worthing Way, 3. Newbury Lane and Preston Drive, 4. Newbury Lane and Amesbury Court, and 5. Point of Timber Road and Preston Drive; all of which are in unincorporated Discovery Bay, Contra Costa County, CA 94505. Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: This project will improve public safety for pedestrians and vehicles at the five pedestrian crosswalks at the intersections identified above. Improvements will increase pedestrian visibility and ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). These improvements include installing Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), electrical power boxes, and detectable warning surfaces at the crosswalk curb ramps, new crosswalk striping, and modifications to existing striping. Existing crosswalks will be upgraded to yellow continental style crosswalks. Ground disturbance is anticipated to occur to a maximum depth of 6 feet for installation of RRFBs and include minor concrete demolition and removal, formwork, and concrete/pavement work. Construction is anticipated to occur in 2026 and take approximately 30 days to complete. Real property transactions, utility relocations, temporary traffic control, and vegetation trimming may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity consists of improving existing crosswalks for public safety and ADA compliance along an existing street with no expansion of use, pursuant to Article 19, Section, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant January 23, 2024 Senior Planner \\pw-data\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Point of Timber Ave Crosswalk, DB (WO1025)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#24-02 NOE Timber Point Crosswalk TDA.docx Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: SHEET OF DATE: DB: CB: PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT LOCATION MAP Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements DP NOV 23 1 1 255 GLACIER DRIVE, MARTINEZ, CA 94553 PH: (925)313-2000 FAX: (925)313-2333 4 BAY POINT JS DISCOVERY BAY Bixler RdNewport DrSlifer D rPoint of Timber Rd Amesbury CtPreston DrNewberry Ln Point of Timber Rd 255 GLACIER D RIVE MARTINEZ, CALIFORN IA 94553 PH : (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333 PROJEC T VICINITY MAP - CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Timber Poi nt Crossw alk Improvemen ts FEDERAL ID NO:DB: CB:DATE:DP NOV 2023 1 1Page of JS 0 500 1,000250Fe et ±5 3 1 4 Timber P oint Elementary Schoo l Slifer Pa rk 1. Newport Dr and Cambr idge Way 2. Newport Dr and Worthing Way 3. Newbury Ln and Preston Dr 4. Newbury Ln and Amesbur y Ct 5. Point of Timber Rd and Pr eston Dr Cros swal k Lo cations 2 Rav enswood Park 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-60 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-60 for the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, El Sobrante area. (31% Transportation Development Act Funds, 69% Local Road Funds) Attachments:1. Attachment A to Resolution.pdf, 2. Attachment B to Resolution.pdf, 3. CP#24-05 NOE and Figures Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project and take related actions under CEQA, El Sobrante area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution to APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the total amount of $120,000 for the fiscal year 2024/2025 for the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project. APPROVE the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project,and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee, to advertise the Project, El Sobrante area. [County Project No. WO1025, DCD-CP#24-05] (District I) DETERMINE the project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 1(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $385,000. (31% Transportation Development Act Funds, 69% Local Road Funds) BACKGROUND: The project consists of constructing a new pedestrian crossing facility across Olinda Road approximately 70 feet east of Olinda Elementary School.The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk,a speed CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-60,Version:1 feet east of Olinda Elementary School.The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk,a speed table,Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)compliant curb ramps,and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs).The existing deficient crosswalk located approximately 165 feet east of Olinda Elementary School will be removed.The new eight-foot-wide crosswalk will be striped with high-visibility yellow traffic paint on top of a 20-foot-wide speed table. RRFBs will be constructed at each end of the crossing facility. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If TDA funding is not obtained, the Project will not be constructed. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)in the total amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project. WHEREAS,Article 3 of the TDA,Public Utilities Code (PUC)Section 99200 et seq.,authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS,the MTC,as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region,has adopted MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised,entitled “Transportation Development Act,Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,”which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS,MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single,countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS,Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-60,Version:1 accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide transportation planning agency,or county association of governments,as the case may be,of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Resolution No. 2024/XX Attachment A Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA A rticle 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document . 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the publi c. Resolution No. 2024/XX page 1 of 2 Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form 1. Agency Contra Costa County Public Works Department 2. Primary Contact Joe Smithonic 3. Mailing Address 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 4. Email Address Joe.Smithonic@pw.cccounty.us 5. Phone Number (925) 313-2348 6. Secondary Contact (in the event primary is not available) Mo Nasser 7. Mailing address (if different) N/A☒ 8. Email Address Mo.Nasser@pw.cccounty.us 9. Phone Number (925) 313-2178 10. Send allocation instructions to (if different from above): 11. Project Title Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements 12. Amount requested $120,000 13. Fiscal Year of Claim 2024/2025 14. Description of Overall Project: 15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.) 16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below: Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only) 17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒ 18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒ Project will construct a speed table with a new crosswalk and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon in front of Olinda Elementary School in El Sobrante. Engineering and Construction costs. A map of the project location is attached. Resolution No. 2024/XX page 2 of 2 19. Project Budget and Schedule Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year) Bike/Ped Plan - ENV 6,000 6,000 01/2024 PA&ED 12,000 12,000 06/2025 PS&E 47,000 - 47,000 12/2025 ROW 65,000 65,000 03/2026 CON 73,000 182,000 255,000 08/2026 Total Cost 120,000 265,000 385,000 Project Eligibility A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☒ No☐ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda. December 12, 2023 If "NO," provide an explanation). B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date: February 27, 2024 C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page) D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☐ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? N/A E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility? 2. If “NO” above, is the project is exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☒ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate. F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): August 2026 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement. H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project ? Yes☒ No☐ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the form may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-05 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Sandeep Kajla, (925) 313-2022 Project Location: Olinda Road between Archery Way and Castro Ranch Road, unincorporated El Sobrante, Contra Costa County. Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project consists of constructing a new pedestrian crossing facility across Olinda Road approximately 70 feet east of Olinda Elementary School. The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk, a speed table, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant curb ramps, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs). The existing deficient crosswalk located approximately 165 feet east of Olinda Elementary School will be removed. The new eight-foot-wide crosswalk will be striped with high-visibility yellow traffic paint on top of a 20-foot-wide speed table. RRFBs will be constructed at each end of the crossing facility. Four curbside parking spots will be removed when the widened curb ramps are installed, however, two parking spots will be added with the removal of the deficient crosswalk. The existing sidewalk will be demolished and excavated to 2 feet, and the new wider sidewalk and curb ramps will be installed. The locations of the RRFBs will be excavated to 6 feet to install the RRFB foundation. Existing asphalt in the location of the speed table will be excavated to one foot, followed by the application of hot mix asphalt and striping for the crosswalk. Construction is anticipated to occur during the summer of 2026, and will take approximately 20 days to complete. Construction will have no impact on school hours. No night or weekend work is anticipated. Real Estate transactions, utility relocations, temporary traffic control, and tree and vegetation trimming and removal may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity consists of constructing a pedestrian crossing facility along an existing street with no expansion of use, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 1/31/2024 Senior Planner G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Sandeep Kajla Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2022 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 2: Project Vicinity Map Project Site File Path \\PW-DATA\grpdata\transeng\Sidewalk Priority List\Project Files\Olinda Road\Olinda Road Final-MN Final.dwg Plot Date:11/30/2023 1:31:55 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE: 1" = 15'PRELIMINARY PLANOlinda Road, El Sobrante, CA DRAWN BY: MN CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 1 OF 1 DATE: 11/28/2023OLINDA ROAD FINAL-MN FINAL.DWG CAD FILE:7'Olinda Elementary School5852 Olinda Rd OLINDA ROAD CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTSRemoveExistingCrosswalk55'Typical Path forStudents, Parents,and FacultySpeed Table + Crosswalk(Refer to Cross Section)Speed Table AheadPavement MarkingsExisting SidewalkProposed SidewalkDetectable WarningSurfaceUtility PoleDrivewayCity/County LimitsRectangular RapidFlashing BeaconSign50' 'Speed Hump' +'15 MPH Speed Limit'Warning Signs40'LEGENDExistingBus StopCity of RichmondContra Costa CountySpeed Table Cross SectionFigure 3: Project Plan Sheet G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-05 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Sandeep Kajla, (925) 313-2022 Project Location: Olinda Road between Archery Way and Castro Ranch Road, unincorporated El Sobrante, Contra Costa County. Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project consists of constructing a new pedestrian crossing facility across Olinda Road approximately 70 feet east of Olinda Elementary School. The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk, a speed table, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant curb ramps, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs). The existing deficient crosswalk located approximately 165 feet east of Olinda Elementary School will be removed. The new eight-foot-wide crosswalk will be striped with high-visibility yellow traffic paint on top of a 20-foot-wide speed table. RRFBs will be constructed at each end of the crossing facility. Four curbside parking spots will be removed when the widened curb ramps are installed, however, two parking spots will be added with the removal of the deficient crosswalk. The existing sidewalk will be demolished and excavated to 2 feet, and the new wider sidewalk and curb ramps will be installed. The locations of the RRFBs will be excavated to 6 feet to install the RRFB foundation. Existing asphalt in the location of the speed table will be excavated to one foot, followed by the application of hot mix asphalt and striping for the crosswalk. Construction is anticipated to occur during the summer of 2026, and will take approximately 20 days to complete. Construction will have no impact on school hours. No night or weekend work is anticipated. Real Estate transactions, utility relocations, temporary traffic control, and tree and vegetation trimming and removal may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity consists of constructing a pedestrian crossing facility along an existing street with no expansion of use, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 1/31/2024 Senior Planner G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Sandeep Kajla Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2022 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 2: Project Vicinity Map Project Site File Path \\PW-DATA\grpdata\transeng\Sidewalk Priority List\Project Files\Olinda Road\Olinda Road Final-MN Final.dwg Plot Date:11/30/2023 1:31:55 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE: 1" = 15'PRELIMINARY PLANOlinda Road, El Sobrante, CA DRAWN BY: MN CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 1 OF 1 DATE: 11/28/2023OLINDA ROAD FINAL-MN FINAL.DWG CAD FILE:7'Olinda Elementary School5852 Olinda Rd OLINDA ROAD CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTSRemoveExistingCrosswalk55'Typical Path forStudents, Parents,and FacultySpeed Table + Crosswalk(Refer to Cross Section)Speed Table AheadPavement MarkingsExisting SidewalkProposed SidewalkDetectable WarningSurfaceUtility PoleDrivewayCity/County LimitsRectangular RapidFlashing BeaconSign50' 'Speed Hump' +'15 MPH Speed Limit'Warning Signs40'LEGENDExistingBus StopCity of RichmondContra Costa CountySpeed Table Cross SectionFigure 3: Project Plan Sheet 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-53 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-53 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, on April 13, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m., for the purpose of allowing participants in a 5k foot race to gather safely, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue, on April 13, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue,on April 13,2024,from 7:00 a.m.through 11:30 a.m.,for the purpose of allowing participants in a 5k foot race to gather safely,Kensington area.(District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Zip Code East Bay,Inc.,shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department to maintain public safety.Zip Code East Bay,Inc.plans to fully close Oak View Avenue as a part of a 5K charity foot race taking place in the Kensington area.This block of Oak View Avenue is a short residential street that has been used for other community events in Kensington such as the weekly farmer’s market.This road closure allows community members and participants of the foot race to gather safely. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for the purpose of a 5k foot race gathering. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-53,Version:1 Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue,on April 13,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m.,for the purpose of allowing participants in a 5k foot race to gather safely,Kensington area. (District I) RC23-53 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Zip Code East Bay,Inc to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on April 13,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m.through 11:30 a.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Zip Code East Bay, Inc., shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and Kensington Fire CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-53,Version:1 Department. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-54 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/29/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-54 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street, on March 9, 2024 from 8:00 a.m. through 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of Rodeo Baseball Association Opening Day Parade, Rodeo area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to partially close a portion of Parker Avenue, on March 9, 2024, from 8:00 a.m. through 10:00 a.m., Rodeo area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street,on March 9,2024,from 8:00 a.m.through 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of Rodeo Baseball Association Opening Day Parade, Rodeo area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Rodeo Baseball Association requested the road closure to use as a safe area to create a staging area for the start and finish of their event. The applicant shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c::Larry Gossett-Engineering Services,Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services,Bob Hendry,Engineering Services,Devon Patel,Engineering Services,Chris Lau, Maintenance, CHP, Sheriff- Patrol Division Commander CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-54,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street,on March 9,2024,from 8:00 a.m.through 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of Rodeo Baseball Association Opening Day Parade, Rodeo area. (District V) RC24-7 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Rodeo Baseball Association to fully close Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 9,2024 for the period of 8:00 a.m.through 10:00 a.m.,subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Rodeo Baseball Association shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Sheriff’s Office, the California Highway Patrol and the Fire District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-54,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-55 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-55 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road, on April 2, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Coventry Road, on April 2, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road,on April 2,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department.Pacific Gas and Electric Company has requested the road closure for traffic safety due to the narrow width of the road at the construction site. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-55,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road,on April 2,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-3 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on April 2,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the work area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District and the Kensington Fire Protection District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-55,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-56 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-56 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue, on March 1, 2024, from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue, on March 1, 2024, from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue,on March 1,2024,from 8:30 a.m.through 4:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department to maintain public safety.Pacific Gas and Electric Company is requesting to close a portion of Colgate Avenue for traffic safety due to the narrow roadway at the construction site. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-56,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue,on March 1,2024,from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-4 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 1,2024,for the period of 8:30 a.m.through 4:30 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the construction area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District and the Kensington Fire Protection District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-57 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-57 accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. for the 2023 Countywide Pavement Digouts Project, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Bay Point, Pacheco, Contra Costa Centre, Kirker Pass, and Lafayette areas. (100% SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Funds) Attachments:1. Recordable Resolution_2025, 2. Signed Resolution 2024-57.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Notice of Completion for the 2023 Countywide Pavement Digouts Project, Bay Point, Pacheco, Contra Costa Centre, Kirker Pass, and Lafayette areas. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Bay Cities Paving &Grading, Inc.for the 2023 Countywide Pavement Digouts Project,as recommended by the Public Works Director,Bay Point,Pacheco,Contra Costa Centre,Kirker Pass,and Lafayette areas.(County Project No.0672-6U2025), (District II, IV, V) FISCAL IMPACT: The Project was funded by 100% SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Director reports that said work has been inspected and complies with the approved plans, special provisions and standard specifications and recommends its acceptance as complete as of December 21, 2023. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The contractor will not be paid and acceptance notification will not be recorded. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-57,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-59 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-59 establishing a rate of $30 per Equivalent Runoff Unit for Stormwater Utility Area 17 (Unincorporated County) for Fiscal Year 2024–2025 and requesting that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District adopt annual parcel assessments for drainage maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Countywide. (100% Stormwater Utility Area 17 Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Adopt Resolution Requesting that the Flood Control District Adopt Annual Parcel Assessments for the County’s Watershed Program. Project #7517-6W7091 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution establishing a rate of $30 per Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU)for Stormwater Utility Area 17 (Unincorporated County)for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and requesting that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FC District)adopt annual parcel assessments for drainage maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: The 2024-2025 rate per ERU is the same as that set for fiscal year 2023-2024.Therefore,there will be no change in rate for Unincorporated County property owners.The unincorporated area of Contra Costa County will produce approximately $3,653,028 which will be used to implement the Unincorporated County’s Stormwater Program. All associated costs are funded 100% by Stormwater Utility Area 17 Funds. BACKGROUND: The Clean Water Program consists of the County,Contra Costa cities,and the FC District working together to prevent,reduce,or eliminate the discharge of pollutants into the storm drain system,including creeks and other natural waterways.The Clean Water Program was established in response to changes in the Federal Clean Water Act.The Clean Water permitting program is known as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)Program.To be in compliance with the current Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP),Clean Water Program participants implement stormwater programs to comply with the provisions outlined in the MRP.These stormwater programs are paid for with stormwater utility fee CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-59,Version:1 provisions outlined in the MRP.These stormwater programs are paid for with stormwater utility fee assessments. Adoption of the attached resolution will begin the annual process of assessment adoption. The Board of Supervisors is being asked to set a rate of $30 for one ERU in the Unincorporated County areas and to request that the FC District adopt the stormwater utility assessment.(The FC District is the only entity under state law with legal authority to assess this particular assessment.) The Public Works Department administers the County Stormwater Program.Examples of how the assessment is being spent in the current year include: 1.Work with County Building Inspection and Public Works inspectors and construction companies/contractors to reduce construction contaminants,such as paint,cement,oil/fuels,and soil erosion from entering storm drains and creeks. 2.Encourage Planners and the development community to use new designs that will reduce contaminated stormwater runoff. 3.Educate the public on the benefits of reducing pesticides and other toxic household product use and their proper disposal. 4.Educate County Engineers and Maintenance staff on flood control design,construction,and maintenance practices that protect water quality and preserve natural watershed habitats. 5.Inspect industrial and commercial businesses for evidence that spill prevention,equipment maintenance and cleaning,waste handling and disposal,and other business practices are done in a manner that minimizes stormwater contamination. 6. Educate marina operators and their marina users through a marina program. 7. Implement trash reduction control measures. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the rate per ERU is not set for the coming fiscal year,funds will not be available for the County’s Watershed Program to comply with the MRP.The San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board has the authority to issue fines of up to $10,000 per day against those municipalities that do not comply with the MRP and fail to implement the stormwater programs in compliance with the MRP provisions. cc:Laura Strobel, County Administrator’s Office, laura.strobel@cao.cccounty.us Thomas L. Geiger, County Counsel, tgeig@cc.cccounty.us Bob Campbell, County Auditor-Controller, bob.campbell@ac.cccounty.us Dorothy Lim, County Auditor-Controller’s Office, dorothy.lim@ac.cccounty.us Allison Knapp, Deputy Public Works Director, allison.knapp@pw.cccounty.us Tim Jensen, Flood Control, tim.jensen@pw.cccounty.us Michelle Cordis, Flood Control, michelle.cordis@pw.cccounty.us Michele Mancuso, County Watershed Program, Michele.Mancuso@pw.cccounty.us Jennifer Joel, County Watershed Program, Jennifer.Joel@pw.cccounty.us CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-59,Version:1 Jennifer Joel, County Watershed Program, Jennifer.Joel@pw.cccounty.us Rachelle Untal, Flood Control, Rachelle.Untal@pw.cccounty.us Catherine Windham, Flood Control, catherine.windham@pw.cccounty.us THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:ESTABLISH the rate per Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU)for Stormwater Utility Area 17 (Unincorporated County)for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and request that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FC District)ADOPT an annual parcel assessment for drainage maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program, Countywide. The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES THAT; WHEREAS,under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,prescribed discharges of stormwater require a permit from the appropriate California regional water quality board under the NPDES Program; and WHEREAS,the COUNTY of CONTRA COSTA (County)did apply for,and did receive,an NPDES permit, which requires the implementation of selected Best Management Practices (BMPs)to minimize or eliminate pollutants from entering stormwaters; and WHEREAS,it is the intent of the County to utilize funds received from its Stormwater Utility Area (SUA)for implementation of the NPDES Program and drainage maintenance activities; and WHEREAS,at the request of the County,the FC District has completed the process for formation of an SUA, including the adoption of the Stormwater Utility Assessment Drainage Ordinance NO. 93-47; and WHEREAS,the SUA and Program Group Costs Payment agreement between the County and the FC District requires that the County determine the rate to be assessed to a single ERU for the forthcoming fiscal year in the Unincorporated County; and NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that the County Board of Supervisors does determine that the rate to be assigned to a single ERU for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 shall be set at $30. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the County Board of Supervisors does hereby request the FC District to adopt SUA 17 levies based on said amount. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0598 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RECEIVE report concerning the final settlement of Cara Kerby vs. Contra Costa County; and AUTHORIZE payment from the Workers' Compensation Internal Service Fund in an amount not to exceed $65,000 as recommended by the Director of Risk Management. (100% Workers’ Compensation Internal Service Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Karen Caoile, Director of Risk Management Report Title:Final Settlement of Claim, Cara Kerby vs. Contra Costa County ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RECEIVE this report concerning the final settlement of Cara Kerby and AUTHORIZE payment from the Workers' Compensation Internal Service Fund in an amount not to exceed $65,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Workers' Compensation Internal Service Fund payment of $65,000. BACKGROUND: Attorney Suzanne M. Aboujudom, defense counsel for the County, has advised the County Administrator that within authorization an agreement has been reached settling the workers' compensation claim of Cara Kerby vs. Contra Costa County. The Board's February 6, 2024, closed session vote was: Supervisors Gioia, Andersen, Burgis, Carlson and Glover - Yes. This action is taken so that the terms of this final settlement and the earlier February 6, 2024, closed session vote of this Board authorizing its negotiated settlement are known publicly. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Case will not be settled. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0598,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0599 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:DENY claims filed by Hoda Abdolrazek, Ziad Abunie, Antoine Rapheal Sr. Anderson, Robert Brock, Rebecca Garza, Anne Hancock, Ashika Kanji, Doraiswami Ramesh, Cristina Sales, Heir of Michael J. Wright, and Karen Lee Scott. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Report Title:Claims ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: DENY claims filed by Hoda Abdolrazek, Ziad Abunie, Antoine Rapheal Sr. Anderson, Robert Brock, Rebecca Garza, Anne Hancock, Ashika Kanji, Doraiswami Ramesh, Cristina Sales, Heir of Michael J. Wright, and Karen Lee Scott. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Hoda Abdolrazek: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and automobile accident in the amount of $1,000,000. Ziad Abunie: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and automobile accident in the amount of $1,000,000. Antoine Rapheal Sr. Anderson: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and bicycle accident in the amount of $100,000,000. Robert Brock: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and motorcycle accident in the amount of $5,000,000 plus. Rebecca Garza: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and trip and fall in the amount of $100,000,000. Anne Hancock: Fraud claim related to alleged illegal eviction in an undisclosed amount. Ashika Kanji: Personal injury claim related to motor vehicle accident in the amount of $1,000,000. Doraiswami Ramesh: Property claim for damage to vehicle in the amount of $6,130. Cristina Sales, Heir of Michael J. Wright: Wrongful death claim related to dangerous condition and motorcycle accident in the amount of $75,000,000. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0599,Version:1 Karen Lee Scott: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and bicycle accident in the amount of $250,000. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Not acting on the claims could extend the claimants’ time limits to file actions against the County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0600 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Sheriff's Deputy Vivian Eriksen to pay the County $1.00 for retired Sheriff’s Service Dog "Xena" on February 28, 2024. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Transfer of K-9 Service Dog Xena ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Sheriff's Deputy Vivian Eriksen to pay the County $1.00 for retired Sheriff’s Service Dog "Xena" on February 28, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: On December 18,2007,the Board of Supervisors approved Board Resolution No.2007/172,which authorized the transfer of ownership of retired police canine (K-9)service dogs to their respective handlers for minimal ($1.00)consideration.Police dogs typically reach the end of their useful service lives around the age of 8 years. Although the approximate costs of purchasing a police dog ($11,000)and training it ($8,000)are substantial, the service received from these dogs is well worth the expenditure.However,upon their retirement from service,the dogs cease being a financial “asset”and instead become a continuous expense.By transferring ownership of the dog to its handler,all ongoing expenses are absorbed by the handler in exchange for his/her dog’s companionship in the sunset years of the dog’s life. On rare occasions,the K-9 handler is unable to accept ownership of his/her retired service dog.In these situations,the Sheriff’s Office seeks authorization to transfer ownership of retired K-9’s to private citizens whom the Office of the Sheriff has determined to be suitable to accept the dog.In exchange for a minimal ($1.00)consideration for the transfer of ownership,the new owner will assume all costs - food, shelter, veterinary, licensing, and liability - for the dog. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0600,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0601 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Tek84, in an amount not to exceed $49,995, to service the Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner located at the Sheriff’s West County Detention Facility for the period February 8, 2024 to February 7, 2029. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to enter into a service agreement with Tek84, including modified indemnification and limitation of liability language, to provide service to the Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner located at the Sheriff’s West County Detention Facility, in an amount not to exceed $49,995, for the period of February 8, 2024 to February 7, 2029. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in up to $49,995 in contractual service expenditures over a five-year period and will be funded 100% by the Sheriff’s Office budgeted General Fund. BACKGROUND: The Tek94 Intercept Whole Body Scanner, which is currently located at the Sheriff’s West County Detention Facility, is used to keep contraband and dangerous drugs from entering the West County Detention Facility. This agreement will allow Tek84 to provide preventative maintenance, coverage for all repair parts, labor and shipping as needed, software system upgrades and a Radiation Safety Survey for the Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner. The Terms and Conditions of this service agreement include an indemnification and limitation of liability provision approved by County Counsel. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0601,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not vote in favor, Tek84 will not be able to provide maintenance or repair to our Tek84 Whole Body Scanner, which is essential in keeping contraband and dangerous drugs from entering the West County Detention Facility. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0602 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $22,320, for the installation of automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-6 and hosted software system services, for the period March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2026. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc., including mutual indemnification, for the installation of automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-6 and provision of a hosted software system, in an amount not to exceed $22,320, for the term March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in up to $22,320 in contractual service expenditures over a 2-year period and will be funded by the County General Fund. BACKGROUND: Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc. provides automatic license plate reader cameras with 24/7 monitoring for homes, businesses and neighborhoods to protect against property crime, violent crime, stolen vehicles and more. In May of 2022, an opportunity to receive grant funding to purchase cameras for the East Contra Costa County Area (P-6) became available. This equipment is fundamental to maintaining the safety of Sheriff's Office personnel, civilians and suspects alike. In recent years, crime rates have risen compromising the safety and security of our communities, especially rural areas such as East Contra Costa County. Individuals often target these areas to commit various crimes such as theft, burglary and more violent crimes. East Contra Costa County is unique because it borders three other counties, including Sacramento County, San Joaquin County and Alameda County. This often makes East Contra Costa County vulnerable to individuals coming into the area and then returning to their respective counties to avoid detection and apprehension. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0602,Version:1 The lack of cameras in rural areas can make preventing or solving these crimes challenging for patrol deputies and investigators. The use of ALPR technology has become commonplace in many Bay Area communities, including several areas and cities in Contra Costa County. The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff would deploy additional fixed ALPRs in strategic areas of East Contra Costa County as a force multiplier and investigative tool to support law enforcement and security efforts with the community. The license plate information is then queried against various databases for wanted or stolen vehicles, missing and endangered persons and other categories. The installation of ALPR cameras would significantly increase our ability to prevent, respond to and solve crimes within all areas of Contra Costa County. Providing additional cameras would help enhance public safety by protecting the citizens of Contra Costa County and the greater Bay Area. Twelve (12) cameras were purchased with State Homeland Security Grant Program FY2020 funds. This service agreement is for the installation of the twelve (12) automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-6 and the provision of a hosted software system. This service agreement includes a mutual indemnification provision. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not approve, the twelve (12) ALPR cameras that were purchased with State Homeland Security Grant Program FY2020 funds will not be installed by Rekor and the Office of the Sheriff will not have access to their software system. We will also not have additional measures in place to deter and solve crime in East Contra Costa County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0603 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute contracts with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Regents of the University of California, for use of the Sheriff's Range Facility for the period March 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (100% Participant fees) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Range Use Contract ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute contracts with the agencies specified below, including mutual indemnification as approved by County Counsel, for use of the Sheriff's Range Facility for the period March 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and the Regents of the University of California, on behalf of its San Francisco Campus’ Department of Police FISCAL IMPACT: There is no net county cost. This agreement will be 100% funded by participant fees. BACKGROUND: Local, state, and federal law enforcement officers are required to complete firearms qualifications on a regular basis. The Office of the Sheriff has a firing range and classroom that can be used by other law enforcement agencies for firearms qualifications when not in use by County staff. The recommended contracts provide for use of the Sheriff's Range Facilities, including firearms range and classroom, for firearms qualification of these government agencies' employees. The County Counsel's Office has approved the mutual indemnification language included in the contracts. The contract agencies will pay a per-day fee for access to the Sheriff's Range Facility. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0603,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action on this request would mean a loss of revenue for the County and a valuable loss of services for outside agencies. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0604 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a license agreement with Comcast IP Phone, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 annually, to provide subscriber data for the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services Community Warning System, starting March 1, 2024, until the termination of the agreement by either party. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Comcast IP Phone, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a license agreement with Comcast IP Phone, LLC, including modified indemnification and limitation of liability language, to provide subscriber data for the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services Community Warning System, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 annually, starting March 1, 2024, until the termination of the agreement by either party. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in up to $10,000 in contractual service expenditures annually and will be funded by the General Fund. BACKGROUND: This license agreement with Comcast IP Phone, LLC, is for access to subscriber data for the Community Warning System for emergency alert notification. Utilizing multiple data sources for contact information in emergency alert systems is essential for ensuring comprehensive coverage and effectiveness. By incorporating diverse channels, in addition to our Reverse 911 source, such as a Public Utility specialized registry, emergency alerts can reach a broader and more diverse audience, including individuals with varying communication preferences and accessibility needs. This approach provides redundancy, improves the accuracy of contact information, enhances resilience in adverse conditions, and increases the likelihood of reaching individuals even when traditional communication channels are disrupted or overloaded. Overall, leveraging CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0604,Version:1 multiple data sources strengthens the reliability, reach, and responsiveness of emergency alerting efforts, contributing to enhanced public safety and preparedness during emergencies. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not approve, the Office of the Sheriff Emergency Services Division will not be able to utilize another source of contact information, risking incomplete coverage in our emergency alert system. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-58 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-58 authorizing the Sheriff Coroner, or designee, to apply for, accept and approve grant funding, including amendments and extensions, with the California Highway Patrol Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for fiscal years 2024-2026, with an initial amount of $169,700 for the purchase of new equipment for the Sheriff’s Forensic Services Toxicology Unit, for the initial period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026. (No County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:California Highway Patrol Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program FY 2024-2026 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution authorizing the Sheriff Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept and approve grant funding, including amendments and extensions, pursuant to the grant guidelines, with the California Highway Patrol Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for fiscal years 2024-2026, with an initial amount of $169,700 for the purchase of new equipment for the Sheriff’s Forensic Services Toxicology Unit, for the initial period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in an initial revenue of $169,700. There is no county match requirement for this grant. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff, Forensic Services Division (FSD) will use monies from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program FY 2024-2026 to purchase a Biotage Extrahera, a fully automated sample preparation instrument, and replace aged equipment including three biohoods and a freezer. The FSD is an accredited crime laboratory providing toxicology services to more than 20 law enforcement agencies. These purchases will ensure more efficient processing and analysis of evidence samples in driving under the influence cases. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-58,Version:1 The purchase of an automated sample handling robot and the replacement of aged equipment are essential to ensuring continuity of laboratory operations. Without these grant purchases, there are increased risks of equipment failure and the inability to perform in-house testing. As a result, many requests for analysis will be sent to an outside laboratory. Analysis performed by an outside laboratory creates an increased prosecution burden and cost to Contra Costa County law enforcement agencies and the District Attorney’s Office. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF Applying for and Accepting a grant from the California Highway Patrol WHEREAS,the County of Contra Costa is seeking funds available through the California Highway Patrol for its Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors: Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff or the Sheriff's Chief of Management Services, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining State financial assistance including grant modifications and extensions provided by the California Highway Patrol. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0605 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ACCEPT the Treasurer's Quarterly Investment Report as of December 31, 2023, as recommended by the County Treasurer-Tax Collector. Attachments:1. Q4_2023 TOC_Final Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Dan Mierzwa, Treasurer-Tax Collector Report Title:ADOPTION OF THE QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT AS OF 12/31/2023 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the Treasurer’s Quarterly Investment Report (the “Report”) as of December 31, 2023, as recommended by the County Treasurer-Tax Collector. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 53646 requires the County Treasurer to prepare quarterly reports to the Board of Supervisors describing County investments including type,par value,cost,and market value.Attached please find the report covering the period October 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023. As of December 31,2023,the par value,cost,and market value of Contra Costa County Investment Pool were $6,873,924,326.77,$6,832,825,416.54,and $6,785,695,673.07,respectively.The weighted yield to maturity was 4.72% and the weighted average days to maturity were 259 days. As of December 31,2023,The Treasurer’s investment portfolio was in compliance with Government Code 53600 et.seq.and with the Treasurer’s current investment policy.Historical activities combined with future cash flow projections indicate that the County should be able to meet its cash flow needs for the next six months. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0605,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Department would be out of compliance with Government Code Section 53646. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER’S QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2023 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Executive Summary 1 II. Contra Costa County Investment Pool Summary 2 III. Appendix A. Investment Portfolio Detail—Managed by Treasurer’s Office 1. Portfolio Statement 6 B. Investment Portfolio Detail – Managed by Outside Contracted Parties 1. PFM 19 2. State of California Local Agency Investment Fund 26 3. Allspring Global Investments 28 4. CAMP 51 5. CalTRUST Liquidity* 6. US Bank 67 7. Other a. East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCS) 71 *No Treasury Pool assets were invested in the CalTRUST Liquidity fund during the quarter. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY •The Treasurer's investment portfolio is in compliance with Government Code 53600 et. seq.. •The Treasurer's investment portfolio is in compliance with the Treasurer's current investment policy. •The Treasurer’s investment portfolio has no securities lending, reverse repurchase agreements or derivatives. •As of 12/31/23, the fair value of the Treasurer’s investment portfolio was 99.31% of the cost. More than 77 percent of the portfolio or over $5.3 billion will mature in less than a year. Historical activities combined with future cash flow projections indicate that the County should be able to meet its cash flow needs for the next six months. •Treasurer’s Investment Portfolio Characteristics Par $6,873,924,326.77 Cost $6,832,825,416.54 Market Valuei $6,785,695,673.07 Weighted Yield to Maturity 4.72% Weighted Average Days to Maturity 259 days Weighted Duration 0.65 year Notes: 1.All reporting information is unaudited but due diligence was utilized in its preparation. The information in this report may be updated and is subject to change without notice. Changes will be reflected in the next report. 2.There may be minor differences between the investment pool summary pages and the attached statements and exhibits from time to time. The variances are largely due to rounding errors, the timing difference in recording and/or posting transactions, interests, security values, etc. 3.All securities and amounts reported are denominated in U.S. Dollars. i A rising rate market will produce unrealized losses in a fixed income portfolio. Mark-to-market losses in bond holdings are not realized losses, bonds are expected to mature at par. The opposite is true for a declining rate market. Page 1 PERCENT OF TYPE PAR VALUE COST FAIR VALUE 4 TOTAL COST A. Investments Managed by Treasurer's Office 1. U.S. Treasuries (STRIPS, Bills, Notes)$755,256,000.00 $747,257,292.37 $747,544,508.96 10.94% 2. U.S. Agencies Federal Home Loan Banks 1,120,117,000.00 1,111,057,308.58 1,100,128,594.56 16.26% Federal National Mortgage Association 364,400,000.00 362,898,851.24 356,401,584.60 5.31% Federal Farm Credit Banks 563,970,000.00 562,805,364.65 555,884,700.29 8.24% Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation 653,000,000.00 649,669,184.38 644,522,458.30 9.51% Subtotal 2,701,487,000.00 2,686,430,708.85 2,656,937,337.75 39.32% 3. Supranationals - International Government 588,000,000.00 584,948,898.03 575,669,654.67 8.56% 4. Money Market Instruments Commercial Paper 1,552,450,000.00 1,539,455,766.74 1,538,790,567.48 22.53% Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 175,000,000.00 175,000,000.00 175,083,715.00 2.56% Time Deposit 3,404.12 3,404.12 3,404.12 0.00% Subtotal 1,727,453,404.12 1,714,459,170.86 1,713,877,686.60 25.09% 5. Corporate Notes 171,445,000.00 170,661,344.28 162,257,690.31 2.50% TOTAL (Section A.)1 5,943,641,404.12 5,903,757,414.39 5,856,286,878.29 86.40% B. Investments Managed by Outside Contractors 1. PFM 77,246,529.93 76,826,050.18 76,468,913.94 1.12% 2. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)243,018,219.68 243,018,219.68 243,018,219.68 3.56% 3. Allspring Global Investments 44,636,239.69 43,841,798.94 44,539,727.81 2 0.64% 4. CAMP 487,574,429.35 487,574,429.35 487,574,429.35 7.14% 5. CalTRUST (Liquidity Fund)- - - 0.00% 6. US Bank (Federated Tax Free Cash Fund)11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 0.17% 7. Other a. EBRCS Bond 5 863,700.20 863,700.20 863,700.20 0.01% TOTAL (Section B.)865,243,710.06 864,028,789.56 864,369,582.19 12.65% C. Cash 65,039,212.59 65,039,212.59 65,039,212.59 0.95% 3GRAND TOTAL (FOR A , B, & C)$6,873,924,326.77 $6,832,825,416.54 $6,785,695,673.07 100.00% Notes: 1. Excludes funds managed by PFM retained by Contra Costa School Insurance Group and Community College District. 2. Base Market Value plus Accrued Interest. 3. Does not include the Futuris Public Entity Trust of the Contra Costa Community College District Retirement Board of Authority. 4. A rising rate market will produce unrealized losses in a fixed income portfolio. Mark-to-market losses in bond holdings are not realized losses, bonds are expected to mature at par. The opposite is true for a declining rate market. 5. East Bay Regional Communications System Authority Revenue Bond 2011 Series B maturing on June 1st 2027. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL December 31, 2023 Page 2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL - EARNING STATISTICS Fiscal Quarter Year To Date To Date Average Daily Balance ($)5,880,999,559.93 6,075,973,593.05 Net Earnings ($)131,556,788.45 69,852,656.62 Earned Income Yield 4.38%4.50% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL - PORTFOLIO STATISTICS Investment Par Fair YTM WAM Percentage Type Value Value of ($)($)(%)(days)Portfolio U.S. Treasury 755,256,000.00 747,544,508.96 5.44 74 11.02% Agencies 2,701,487,000.00 2,656,937,337.75 4.35 425 39.15% Commercial Paper 1,552,450,000.00 1,538,790,567.48 5.54 56 22.68% NCD/YCD 175,000,000.00 175,083,715.00 5.68 87 2.58% Corporate Notes 171,445,000.00 162,257,690.31 1.85 683 2.39% Time Deposit 3,404.12 3,404.12 0.08 144 0.00% Supranationals 588,000,000.00 575,669,654.67 4.01 478 8.48% PFM 77,246,529.93 76,468,913.94 3.82 755 1.13% LAIF 243,018,219.68 243,018,219.68 3.81 4 1 3.58% CAMP 487,574,429.35 487,574,429.35 5.55 5 0 7.19% CalTRUST (Liquidity)- - 0.00 0 0.00% Allspring Global Investments 44,636,239.69 44,539,727.81 5.17 331 0.66% US Bank (Federated Tax Free)11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 3.87 0 0.18% Misc.1 863,700.20 863,700.20 N/A N/A 0.01% Cash 65,039,212.59 65,039,212.59 1.65 2 0 0.96% Total Fund3 6,873,924,326.77 6,785,695,673.07 4.72 259 100.00% 1. East Bay Regional Communications System Authority. 2. Average Earning Allowance of WFB for this quarter. 3. Excludes the Futuris Public Entity Trust of the CCCCD Retirment Board of Authority. 4. PMIA Quarter to Date yield. 5. Distribution Yield as of 12/31/23. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL December 31, 2023 Page 3 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL AT A GLANCE December 31, 2023 NOTES TO INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY AND AT A GLANCE: 1. All report information is unaudited but due diligence was utilized in its preparation. The information in the entire report is obtained at time of preparation hence may be updated after publishing and is subject to change without notice. Changes will be reflected in the next report. 2. There may be slight differences between the portfolio summary/at a glace pages and the attached statements/exhibits from time to time. The variances are largely due to rounding, the timing difference in recording and/or posting transactions, inerestes, security values, etc. 3. All securities and amounts included in the portfolio are denominated in United States Dollars. 4. The Contra Costa County investment portfolio maintains Standard & Poor's highest credit quality rating of AAAf and lowest volatility of S1+. The portfolio consists of a large portion of short-term investments with credit rating of A-1/P-1 or better. The majority of the long-term investments in the portfolio are rated AA or better. 5. In accordance with Contra Costa County's Investment Policy, the Treasurer's Office has constructed a portfolio that safeguards the principal, meets the liquidity needs and achieves a return. As a result, more than 77% of the portfolio will mature in less than a year with a weighted average maturity of 259 days. U.S. Treasuries 10.94% U.S.Agencies39.32% Supranationals8.56% Money Market25.09% Corporate Notes 2.50% PFM 1.12% LAIF3.56% Allspring 0.64%CAMP7.14% CalTRUST 0.00% US Bank 0.17% Other 0.01% Cash 0.95% PORTFOLIO BREAKDOWN BY INVESTMENT 77.54% 9.51%7.07%2.47%3.41% $0 $1,000,000,000 $2,000,000,000 $3,000,000,000 $4,000,000,000 $5,000,000,000 $6,000,000,000 1 yr & less 1 to 2 yrs 2 to 3 yrs 3 to 4 yrs 4+ yrs MATURITY DISTRIBUTION AAA 12.34%AA+ 23.28% AA 4.01% AA- 0.23% A+ 0.46%A 0.25% A- 0.13% A-1+ 56.15% A-1 2.02%NR (CASH) 0.95% NR (Misc.) 0.16% BBB+ 0.02% PORTFOLIO CREDIT QUALITY 4.72%4.73% 3.82%3.81% 5.17% 5.55% 3.87% 1.65% 4.61%4.59% 1.75% 3.93% 4.91% 5.70% 3.37% 1.65% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% Total Treasurer PFM LAIF Allspring CAMP US Bank Cash YTM AND INCOME YIELD YTM Income Yield Total consists of 87% Treasurer, 1% of PFM; 4% LAIF; 1% Allspring; and 7% of CAMP approximately. 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 3/21 6/21 9/21 12/21 3/22 6/22 9/22 12/22 3/23 6/23 9/23 12/23 QUARTERLY WEIGHTED YIELD TO MATURITY CCC Pool YTM SOFR Index County&Agencies 51.80% School Dist. 33.41% Community College Dist. 7.14% Voluntary Participants 7.64% POOL BALANCE BY PARTICIPANTS Note: School Dist. balace includes the bond proceeds. Page 4 Note: All data provided by Bloomberg. MAJOR MARKET AND ECONOMIC DATA AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2023 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12/03 12/05 12/07 12/09 12/11 12/13 12/15 12/17 12/19 12/21 12/23PercentageTREASURY YIELDS AND FED TARGET RATE US 2-YR TREASURY YIELD US 5-YR TREASURY YIELD FEDERAL FUND TARGET RATE -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 12/31/2312/31/2012/31/1712/31/1412/31/1112/31/0812/31/0512/31/02Percentage GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT GDP QoQ Change -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 Dec-23Dec-21Dec-19Dec-17Dec-15Dec-13Dec-11Dec-09Dec-07Dec-05Dec-03Dec-01Percentage CONSUMER PRICE INDEX CPI YoY Change Core CPI YoY Change 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Dec-04 Dec-06 Dec-08 Dec-10 Dec-12 Dec-14 Dec-16 Dec-18 Dec-20 Dec-22PercentageEMPLOYMENT RELATED RATES Unemployment Rate Underemployment Rate Page 5 SECTION III APPENDIX A. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL - MANAGED BY TREASURER’S OFFICE Notes: 1. Statements are generated by the SymPro Treasury Management Software system beginning first quarter of calendar year 2022. 2. Market pricing data are obtained from Interactive Data Corporation/ICE. YTM 365 Page 1 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Time Deposits 0.081WESTAMERICA BANK - TIME DEP86232 3,404.12 3,404.12 05/24/20240.08005/24/2021 3,404.12 N/A121101042B 144 3,404.123,404.123,404.123,404.12Subtotal and Average 0.081 144 Negotiable CDs 5.576TORONTO DOM NY - YCD91108 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 03/04/20245.50012/05/2023 35,003,045.00 A-1+89115BMZ0 63 5.607TORONTO DOM NY - YCD91114 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 03/05/20245.53012/06/2023 35,004,830.00 A-1+89115BN97 64 5.576TORONTO DOM NY - YCD91123 40,000,000.00 40,000,000.00 03/06/20245.50012/08/2023 40,003,240.00 A-1+89115BNR7 65 5.708WELLS FARGO BANK - NCD90962 30,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 03/11/20245.63009/11/2023 30,007,710.00 A-195001KPR9 70 5.931RBC NY - YCD90993 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 06/21/20245.85009/28/2023 35,064,890.00 A-1+78015JBB2 172 175,000,000.00175,083,715.00175,000,000.00210,000,000.00Subtotal and Average 5.676 87 Corporate Notes 0.566TOYOTA MCC - CORP86258 10,000,000.00 9,996,953.80 06/18/20240.50006/18/2021 9,768,260.00 A+89236TJH9 169 2.106BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP85315 5,500,000.00 5,499,749.32 10/24/20242.10010/24/2019 5,353,518.50 A06406RAL1 297 2.106BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP85316 4,500,000.00 4,499,794.90 10/24/20242.10010/24/2019 4,380,151.50 A06406RAL1 297 4.600MASS MUTUAL GLOBAL - CORP90545 12,000,000.00 11,807,620.61 01/11/20252.95001/13/2023 11,730,600.00 AA+57629WCG3 376 1.240GUARDIAN LIFE GLOB FUND - CORP86549 10,000,000.00 9,979,816.39 06/23/20251.10012/02/2021 9,436,370.00 AA+40139LAG8 539 1.079NEW YORK LIFE - CORP86281 10,000,000.00 9,954,540.51 01/15/20260.85007/01/2021 9,239,270.00 AA+64952WDW0 745 1.160NEW YORK LIFE - CORP86244 10,000,000.00 9,997,609.89 06/09/20261.15006/09/2021 9,160,770.00 AA+64952WED1 890 1.941MET LIFE GLOB FUND - CORP86587 10,000,000.00 9,988,717.86 01/11/20271.87501/14/2022 9,131,350.00 AA-59217GER6 1,106 5.186NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL - CORP90393 10,000,000.00 9,729,201.02 09/15/20274.35010/17/2022 9,858,910.00 AA+66815L2K4 1,353 81,454,004.3078,059,200.0082,000,000.0081,441,997.13Subtotal and Average 2.279 675 Commercial Paper Disc. -Amortizing 5.603METLIFE ST FDG - CP90911 35,000,000.00 34,952,750.00 01/10/20245.40008/11/2023 34,937,630.00 A-1+59157TAA1 9 5.542METLIFE ST FDG - CP90988 35,000,000.00 34,952,925.00 01/10/20245.38009/27/2023 34,937,630.00 A-1+59157TAA1 9 5.606TOYOTA MCC - CP90989 35,000,000.00 34,941,822.17 01/12/20245.44009/27/2023 34,927,550.00 A-1+89233GAC0 11 5.709MUFG BK LTD - CP91042 40,000,000.00 39,901,333.33 01/17/20245.55010/16/2023 39,887,160.00 A-162479LAH8 16 5.445KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91134 40,000,000.00 39,893,200.00 01/19/20245.34012/12/2023 39,875,840.00 A-1+50000DAK2 18 5.443KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91143 40,000,000.00 39,893,200.00 01/19/20245.34012/14/2023 39,875,840.00 A-1+50000DAK2 18 5.592TOYOTA MCC - CP91032 35,000,000.00 34,889,137.50 01/22/20245.43010/11/2023 34,875,400.00 A-1+89233GAN6 21 5.459MICROSOFT - CP91081 40,000,000.00 39,869,711.11 01/23/20245.33011/16/2023 39,853,160.00 A-1+59515MAP0 22 5.618MUFG BK LTD - CP91073 30,000,000.00 29,894,966.67 01/24/20245.48011/13/2023 29,884,320.00 A-162479LAQ8 23 5.694TOYOTA MCC - CP90965 35,000,000.00 34,871,666.67 01/25/20245.50009/12/2023 34,859,720.00 A-1+89233GAR7 24 5.510MICROSOFT - CP91044 40,000,000.00 39,827,611.11 01/30/20245.35010/17/2023 39,811,880.00 A-1+59515MAW5 29 5.578METLIFE ST FDG - CP91056 28,500,000.00 28,366,984.17 02/01/20245.42010/26/2023 28,356,702.00 A-1+59157TB10 31 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Report Ver. 7.3.11 Page 6 YTM 365 Page 2 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Commercial Paper Disc. -Amortizing 5.507MICROSOFT - CP91048 40,000,000.00 39,815,722.22 02/01/20245.35010/23/2023 39,800,120.00 A-1+59515MB12 31 5.579TOYOTA MCC - CP91050 40,000,000.00 39,813,311.11 02/01/20245.42010/24/2023 39,797,840.00 A-1+89233GB13 31 5.441KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91119 40,000,000.00 39,793,111.11 02/05/20245.32012/08/2023 39,773,560.00 A-1+50000DB54 35 5.442KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91120 30,000,000.00 29,840,400.00 02/06/20245.32012/08/2023 29,825,700.00 A-1+50000DB62 36 5.596METLIFE ST FDG - CP91052 40,000,000.00 39,764,700.00 02/09/20245.43010/25/2023 39,751,160.00 A-1+59157TB93 39 5.497MICROSOFT - CP91062 30,000,000.00 29,826,450.00 02/09/20245.34010/30/2023 29,814,720.00 A-1+59515MB95 39 5.478MICROSOFT - CP91077 30,000,000.00 29,809,008.33 02/13/20245.33011/14/2023 29,796,990.00 A-1+59515MBD6 43 5.487KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91144 40,000,000.00 39,726,044.44 02/16/20245.36012/14/2023 39,707,840.00 A-1+50000DBG0 46 5.522MICROSOFT - CP91058 40,000,000.00 39,684,944.44 02/23/20245.35010/27/2023 39,669,840.00 A-1+59515MBP9 53 5.494MICROSOFT - CP91069 25,000,000.00 24,792,722.22 02/26/20245.33011/07/2023 24,782,475.00 A-1+59515MBS3 56 5.678TORONTO DOM - CP91063 25,000,000.00 24,782,291.67 02/27/20245.50010/31/2023 24,777,075.00 A-1+89116EBT9 57 5.526MICROSOFT - CP91059 35,000,000.00 34,698,319.45 02/28/20245.35010/27/2023 34,685,035.00 A-1+59515MBU8 58 5.628TOYOTA MCC - CP91066 30,000,000.00 29,727,500.00 03/01/20245.45011/02/2023 29,718,660.00 A-1+89233GC12 60 5.574METLIFE ST FDG - CP91090 30,000,000.00 29,706,958.34 03/06/20245.41011/21/2023 29,698,260.00 A-1+59157TC68 65 5.617METLIFE ST FDG - CP91071 25,000,000.00 24,750,666.67 03/07/20245.44011/08/2023 24,633,925.00 A-1+59157TC76 66 5.513MICROSOFT - CP91072 40,000,000.00 39,602,466.67 03/08/20245.34011/08/2023 39,586,240.00 A-1+59515MC86 67 5.527JOHNSON & JOHNSON - CP91068 35,000,000.00 34,635,902.78 03/11/20245.35011/07/2023 34,623,750.00 A-1+47816FCB5 70 5.447METLIFE ST FDG - CP91149 19,500,000.00 19,287,558.34 03/15/20245.30012/15/2023 19,278,168.00 A-1+59157TCF8 74 5.566TORONTO DOM - CP91155 40,000,000.00 39,536,288.89 03/18/20245.42012/19/2023 39,519,400.00 A-1+89116ECJ0 77 5.508RBC - CP91156 30,000,000.00 29,651,600.00 03/19/20245.36012/20/2023 29,651,600.00 A-1+78015CCK6 78 5.491MICROSOFT - CP91105 35,000,000.00 34,590,626.39 03/20/20245.33012/04/2023 34,574,925.00 A-1+59515MCL7 79 5.508RBC - CP91161 30,000,000.00 29,647,133.33 03/20/20245.36012/21/2023 29,647,133.33 A-1+78015CCL4 79 5.904JP MORGAN - CP90864 35,000,000.00 34,544,300.00 03/25/20245.58006/30/2023 34,541,395.00 A-146640PCR2 84 5.523MICROSOFT - CP91078 40,000,000.00 39,489,733.34 03/27/20245.34011/15/2023 39,472,040.00 A-1+59515MCT0 86 5.505MICROSOFT - CP91099 35,000,000.00 34,528,443.06 04/01/20245.33011/29/2023 34,512,800.00 A-1+59515MD10 91 5.456METLIFE ST FDG - CP91162 25,000,000.00 24,661,388.89 04/02/20245.30012/21/2023 24,650,400.00 A-1+59157TD26 92 5.489METLIFE ST FDG - CP91124 40,000,000.00 39,450,266.67 04/03/20245.32012/08/2023 39,434,960.00 A-1+59157TD34 93 5.508JOHNSON & JOHNSON - CP91084 26,450,000.00 26,059,495.10 04/10/20245.31511/16/2023 26,051,848.15 A-1+47816FDA6 100 5.483METLIFE ST FDG - CP91145 28,000,000.00 27,566,350.00 04/15/20245.31012/14/2023 27,557,516.00 A-1+59157TDF7 105 5.482METLIFE ST FDG - CP91150 40,000,000.00 39,380,500.00 04/15/20245.31012/15/2023 39,367,880.00 A-1+59157TDF7 105 5.516MICROSOFT - CP91137 40,000,000.00 39,377,000.00 04/15/20245.34012/12/2023 39,364,440.00 A-1+59515MDF9 105 5.470MICROSOFT - CP91157 40,000,000.00 39,364,000.00 04/18/20245.30012/20/2023 39,348,120.00 A-1+59515MDJ1 108 5.517METLIFE ST FDG - CP91141 40,000,000.00 39,295,255.55 04/29/20245.33012/13/2023 39,291,920.00 A-1+59157TDV2 119 1,539,455,766.741,538,790,567.481,552,450,000.001,393,025,131.28Subtotal and Average 5.539 56 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 7 YTM 365 Page 3 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Coupon Securities 4.842FHLB - AGENCY90547 10,000,000.00 9,999,554.53 01/19/20244.75001/19/2023 9,997,040.00 AA+3130AUM92 18 4.778FHLB - AGENCY90574 10,000,000.00 9,999,737.50 02/06/20244.75002/06/2023 9,991,840.00 AA+3130AUSH8 36 5.016FHLB - AGENCY90588 10,000,000.00 9,999,825.00 02/13/20245.00002/13/2023 9,994,010.00 AA+3130AUVK7 43 5.470FHLB - AGENCY90901 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 06/10/20245.47008/01/2023 35,017,605.00 AA+3130AWSB7 161 3.480FFCB - AGENCY90215 10,000,000.00 9,989,832.50 06/17/20243.25006/17/2022 9,930,360.00 AA+3133ENYX2 168 3.273FFCB - AGENCY90216 10,000,000.00 9,998,980.94 06/17/20243.25006/17/2022 9,930,360.00 AA+3133ENYX2 168 1.661FNMA - AGENCY85280 20,000,000.00 19,994,594.99 10/15/20241.62510/18/2019 19,490,400.00 AA+3135G0W66 288 1.661FNMA - AGENCY85281 10,000,000.00 9,997,297.50 10/15/20241.62510/18/2019 9,745,200.00 AA+3135G0W66 288 4.420FFCB - AGENCY90391 10,000,000.00 9,996,623.61 10/17/20244.37510/17/2022 9,951,290.00 AA+3133ENS43 290 5.250FHLB - AGENCY91092 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 11/22/20245.25011/22/2023 25,104,225.00 AA+3130AXWB0 326 4.385FFCB - AGENCY90512 10,000,000.00 9,987,591.11 12/20/20244.25012/20/2022 9,942,330.00 AA+3133EN4N7 354 4.385FFCB - AGENCY90513 10,000,000.00 9,987,600.81 12/20/20244.25012/20/2022 9,942,330.00 AA+3133EN4N7 354 4.315FFCB - AGENCY90514 10,000,000.00 9,993,989.44 12/20/20244.25012/20/2022 9,942,330.00 AA+3133EN4N7 354 1.027FHLB - AGENCY86558 10,000,000.00 9,997,429.44 12/20/20241.00012/22/2021 9,639,940.00 AA+3130AQF40 354 4.887FFCB - AGENCY90431 10,000,000.00 9,999,195.77 01/10/20254.87511/10/2022 10,031,080.00 AA+3133ENZ37 375 1.370FFCB - AGENCY86598 10,000,000.00 9,994,862.96 01/21/20251.32001/21/2022 9,670,350.00 AA+3133ENLU2 386 1.820FFCB - AGENCY90013 10,000,000.00 9,992,406.87 02/14/20251.75002/15/2022 9,695,400.00 AA+3133ENPG9 410 4.800FFCB - AGENCY90592 10,000,000.00 9,994,609.47 02/21/20254.75002/23/2023 10,019,430.00 AA+3133EPBH7 417 4.004FFCB - AGENCY90692 10,000,000.00 9,999,689.13 03/10/20254.00004/10/2023 9,938,800.00 AA+3133EPFL4 434 4.303FFCB - AGENCY90665 10,000,000.00 9,964,302.08 03/28/20254.00003/28/2023 9,941,050.00 AA+3133EPER2 452 2.750FFCB - AGENCY90138 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/25/20252.75004/25/2022 9,787,790.00 AA+3133ENVC1 480 4.666FHLB - AGENCY90840 10,000,000.00 9,994,518.21 06/06/20254.62506/12/2023 10,055,800.00 AA+3130AWER7 522 4.284FFCB - AGENCY90506 10,000,000.00 9,995,360.00 06/13/20254.25012/13/2022 9,958,210.00 AA+3133EN4B3 529 0.542FNMA - AGENCY85679 20,000,000.00 19,987,888.54 06/17/20250.50006/19/2020 18,872,700.00 AA+3135G04Z3 533 0.705FHLB - AGENCY86282 10,000,000.00 9,999,263.29 06/30/20250.70007/06/2021 9,461,540.00 AA+3130AN4A5 546 4.808FFCB - AGENCY90891 10,000,000.00 9,991,444.44 07/21/20254.75007/21/2023 10,025,530.00 AA+3133EPQN8 567 4.985FFCB - AGENCY90898 10,000,000.00 9,983,706.63 07/28/20254.87507/28/2023 10,061,200.00 AA+3133EPRS6 574 4.010FFCB - AGENCY90789 10,000,000.00 9,998,811.51 08/18/20254.00005/18/2023 9,928,110.00 AA+3133EPKA2 595 4.475FFCB - AGENCY90344 10,000,000.00 9,963,599.54 09/30/20254.25009/30/2022 9,972,230.00 AA+3133ENP95 638 5.152FFCB - AGENCY91031 10,000,000.00 9,995,562.50 10/10/20255.12510/10/2023 10,120,030.00 AA+3133EPYK5 648 5.245FFCB - AGENCY91046 10,000,000.00 9,991,276.54 10/10/20255.12510/18/2023 10,131,418.89 AA+3133EPYK5 648 0.573FNMA - AGENCY85911 10,000,000.00 9,986,717.10 11/07/20250.50011/12/2020 9,314,510.00 AA+3135G06G3 676 4.625FFCB - AGENCY91126 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/08/20254.62512/08/2023 10,054,390.00 AA+3133EPL37 707 4.747FFCB - AGENCY91132 10,000,000.00 9,981,495.73 12/08/20254.62512/11/2023 10,058,244.17 AA+3133EPL37 707 4.250FFCB - AGENCY90587 10,000,000.00 9,975,305.56 02/13/20264.12502/13/2023 9,983,650.00 AA+3133EPAQ8 774 4.764FFCB - AGENCY90627 10,000,000.00 9,997,176.33 03/09/20264.75003/09/2023 10,117,970.00 AA+3133EPCR4 798 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 8 YTM 365 Page 4 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Coupon Securities 4.715FFCB - AGENCY90879 10,000,000.00 9,981,514.47 04/10/20264.62507/12/2023 10,092,250.00 AA+3133EPPR0 830 3.857FFCB - AGENCY90724 10,000,000.00 9,977,166.67 04/13/20263.75004/13/2023 9,906,590.00 AA+3133EPFT7 833 4.088FFCB - AGENCY90803 10,000,000.00 9,980,297.22 05/26/20264.00005/26/2023 9,955,210.00 AA+3133EPKX2 876 4.572FFCB - AGENCY90875 10,000,000.00 9,954,163.43 07/06/20264.37507/06/2023 10,048,500.00 AA+3133EPPE9 917 4.793FFCB - AGENCY90963 10,000,000.00 9,994,415.66 07/08/20264.75009/11/2023 10,137,018.33 AA+3133EPVP7 919 4.551FFCB - AGENCY90914 10,000,000.00 9,987,601.30 08/14/20264.50008/14/2023 10,084,110.00 AA+3133EPSW6 956 4.683FFCB - AGENCY90915 10,000,000.00 9,955,644.07 08/14/20264.50008/14/2023 10,084,110.00 AA+3133EPSW6 956 4.739FFCB - AGENCY90918 10,000,000.00 9,943,568.81 08/14/20264.50008/15/2023 10,085,360.00 AA+3133EPSW6 956 4.205FFCB - AGENCY91163 10,000,000.00 9,977,856.08 12/22/20264.12512/22/2023 10,009,520.00 AA+3133EPQ73 1,086 4.021FFCB - AGENCY90666 10,000,000.00 9,993,762.56 03/29/20274.00003/29/2023 9,979,770.00 AA+3133EPEE1 1,183 3.990FFCB - AGENCY90761 10,000,000.00 9,964,979.86 04/26/20273.87504/26/2023 9,942,230.00 AA+3133EPGT6 1,211 4.125FFCB - AGENCY90386 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/14/20274.12510/14/2022 10,029,830.00 AA+3133ENS50 1,382 4.720FFCB - AGENCY91079 10,000,000.00 9,966,795.69 11/15/20274.62511/15/2023 10,224,200.00 AA+3133EPC60 1,414 3.533FFCB - AGENCY90718 10,000,000.00 9,987,072.72 04/12/20283.50004/12/2023 9,794,270.00 AA+3133EPFU4 1,563 4.361FFCB - AGENCY90904 8,970,000.00 8,653,789.58 08/09/20283.50008/02/2023 8,771,493.90 AA+3133EPJE6 1,682 4.665FFCB - AGENCY90982 10,000,000.00 9,931,204.00 09/22/20284.50009/22/2023 10,260,150.00 AA+3133EPWK7 1,726 4.936FFCB - AGENCY91065 10,000,000.00 9,974,093.33 11/01/20284.87511/01/2023 10,437,570.00 AA+3133EPA47 1,766 587,954,175.02585,660,875.29588,970,000.00592,091,786.13Subtotal and Average 3.965 634 Federal Agency Disc. -Amortizing 5.522FHLB - AGENCY DISC90979 35,000,000.00 34,994,856.94 01/02/20245.29009/21/2023 34,979,735.00 A-1+313384RG6 1 4.933FHLB - AGENCY DISC90745 4,500,000.00 4,497,665.00 01/05/20244.67004/19/2023 4,495,441.50 A-1+313384RK7 4 5.542FHLB - AGENCY DISC90899 4,690,000.00 4,674,268.96 01/24/20245.25007/28/2023 4,672,351.53 A-1+313384SE0 23 5.542FHLB - AGENCY DISC90900 2,500,000.00 2,491,614.58 01/24/20245.25007/28/2023 2,490,592.50 A-1+313384SE0 23 4.906FHLB - AGENCY DISC90551 6,000,000.00 5,981,580.00 01/25/20244.60501/25/2023 5,976,558.00 A-1+313384SF7 24 4.906FHLB - AGENCY DISC90552 5,000,000.00 4,984,650.00 01/25/20244.60501/25/2023 4,980,465.00 A-1+313384SF7 24 5.439FHLB - AGENCY DISC91040 35,000,000.00 34,856,266.67 01/29/20245.28010/13/2023 34,842,990.00 A-1+313384SK6 28 5.570FHLB - AGENCY DISC91038 35,000,000.00 34,844,541.67 01/31/20245.33010/12/2023 34,832,840.00 A-1+313384SM2 30 5.452FHLB - AGENCY DISC91102 35,000,000.00 34,811,145.83 02/07/20245.25011/30/2023 34,795,040.00 A-1+313384SU4 37 5.450FHLB - AGENCY DISC91057 40,000,000.00 39,753,133.33 02/12/20245.29010/27/2023 39,736,520.00 A-1+313384SZ3 42 5.377FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91087 30,000,000.00 29,808,050.00 02/14/20245.23511/17/2023 29,793,600.00 A-1+313396TB9 44 5.380FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91091 25,000,000.00 24,832,611.11 02/16/20245.24011/22/2023 24,820,675.00 A-1+313396TD5 46 5.430FNMA - AGENCY DISC91116 40,000,000.00 39,709,722.22 02/20/20245.22512/07/2023 39,689,640.00 A-1+313588TH8 50 5.350FFCB - AGENCY DISC91164 25,000,000.00 24,814,770.83 02/21/20245.23012/22/2023 24,802,375.00 A-1+313312TJ9 51 5.354FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91129 25,000,000.00 24,814,947.92 02/21/20245.22512/11/2023 24,802,375.00 A-1+313396TJ2 51 5.351FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91121 40,000,000.00 39,698,400.00 02/22/20245.22012/08/2023 39,677,960.00 A-1+313396TK9 52 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 9 YTM 365 Page 5 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Disc. -Amortizing 5.421FNMA - AGENCY DISC91122 40,000,000.00 39,698,688.89 02/22/20245.21512/08/2023 39,677,960.00 A-1+313588TK1 52 5.566FHLB - AGENCY DISC91055 40,000,000.00 39,658,444.44 02/28/20245.30010/26/2023 39,642,800.00 A-1+313384TR0 58 5.634FHLB - AGENCY DISC90958 9,954,000.00 9,859,857.28 03/05/20245.32009/07/2023 9,858,312.20 A-1+313384TX7 64 5.490FHLB - AGENCY DISC91095 40,000,000.00 39,586,227.78 03/12/20245.24511/28/2023 39,575,320.00 A-1+313384UE7 71 5.459FNMA - AGENCY DISC91109 35,000,000.00 34,634,600.00 03/13/20245.22012/05/2023 34,623,400.00 A-1+313588UF0 72 5.418FHLB - AGENCY DISC91165 5,000,000.00 4,943,775.00 03/19/20245.19012/22/2023 4,941,895.00 A-1+313384UM9 78 5.418FHLB - AGENCY DISC91166 36,000,000.00 35,595,180.00 03/19/20245.19012/22/2023 35,581,644.00 A-1+313384UM9 78 5.459FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91110 35,000,000.00 34,604,529.17 03/19/20245.21512/05/2023 34,593,265.00 A-1+313396UM3 78 5.298FHLB - AGENCY DISC91130 25,000,000.00 24,710,000.00 03/21/20245.22012/11/2023 24,702,300.00 A-1+313384UP2 80 5.503FHLB - AGENCY DISC91082 40,000,000.00 39,493,950.00 03/28/20245.23511/16/2023 39,483,520.00 A-1+313384UW7 87 5.387FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91083 40,000,000.00 39,490,577.78 03/29/20245.21011/16/2023 39,477,760.00 A-1+313396UX9 88 5.349FNMA - AGENCY DISC91117 35,000,000.00 34,526,148.61 04/04/20245.18512/07/2023 34,516,685.00 A-1+313588VD4 94 5.507FHLB - AGENCY DISC91097 40,000,000.00 39,429,422.22 04/08/20245.24011/28/2023 39,424,880.00 A-1+313384VH9 98 5.418FHLB - AGENCY DISC91098 40,000,000.00 39,423,600.00 04/09/20245.24011/28/2023 39,419,160.00 A-1+313384VJ5 99 5.345FHLB - AGENCY DISC91169 35,000,000.00 34,490,370.83 04/11/20245.19012/26/2023 34,481,790.00 A-1+313384VL0 101 5.287FHLB - AGENCY DISC90800 4,073,000.00 4,014,136.67 04/15/20244.95505/25/2023 4,010,377.63 A-1+313384VQ9 105 5.467FHLB - AGENCY DISC91125 40,000,000.00 39,392,750.00 04/15/20245.20512/08/2023 39,385,000.00 A-1+313384VQ9 105 5.466FHLB - AGENCY DISC91131 40,000,000.00 39,386,966.67 04/16/20245.20512/11/2023 39,379,320.00 A-1+313384VR7 106 5.415FHLB - AGENCY DISC91147 40,000,000.00 39,392,266.67 04/16/20245.16012/14/2023 39,379,320.00 A-1+313384VR7 106 5.383FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91093 45,000,000.00 44,304,500.00 04/17/20245.20011/27/2023 44,295,300.00 A-1+313396VS9 107 5.367FHLB - AGENCY DISC91168 25,000,000.00 24,606,010.42 04/19/20245.20512/26/2023 24,601,400.00 A-1+313384VU0 109 5.456FHLB - AGENCY DISC91138 40,000,000.00 39,336,833.33 04/25/20245.19012/12/2023 39,328,040.00 A-1+313384WA3 115 5.413FHLB - AGENCY DISC91170 40,000,000.00 39,334,933.34 04/26/20245.16012/27/2023 39,322,360.00 A-1+313384WB1 116 5.359FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91142 40,000,000.00 39,309,333.34 04/30/20245.18012/13/2023 39,299,600.00 A-1+313396WF6 120 5.317FHLB - AGENCY DISC91171 40,000,000.00 39,307,611.11 05/01/20245.15012/27/2023 39,304,240.00 A-1+313384WG0 121 5.297FHLB - AGENCY DISC90850 2,500,000.00 2,444,488.54 06/10/20244.96506/16/2023 2,442,372.50 A-1+313384XY0 161 5.427FHLB - AGENCY DISC90888 5,000,000.00 4,870,433.33 07/03/20245.07007/20/2023 4,871,255.00 A-1+313384YX1 184 1,231,413,860.481,231,008,434.861,245,217,000.001,209,903,022.70Subtotal and Average 5.421 77 Treasury Coupon Securities 2.661US TREASURY NOTES90183 1,500,000.00 1,499,229.72 04/30/20242.50005/19/2022 1,486,288.50 AA+91282CEK3 120 2.661US TREASURY NOTES90184 2,500,000.00 2,498,716.20 04/30/20242.50005/19/2022 2,477,147.50 AA+91282CEK3 120 1.261US TREASURY NOTES86597 2,500,000.00 2,496,527.38 01/15/20251.12501/21/2022 2,408,260.00 AA+91282CDS7 380 6,494,473.306,371,696.006,500,000.006,494,079.47Subtotal and Average 2.123 220 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 10 YTM 365 Page 6 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Treasury Bills 5.526US TREASURY BILLS90980 35,000,000.00 34,994,866.67 01/02/20245.28009/21/2023 35,000,000.00 A-1+912797HX8 1 5.520US TREASURY BILLS91045 35,000,000.00 34,994,852.08 01/02/20245.29510/18/2023 35,000,000.00 A-1+912797HX8 1 5.428US TREASURY BILLS91118 40,000,000.00 39,953,413.33 01/09/20245.24112/08/2023 39,959,200.00 A-1+912797HY6 8 5.569US TREASURY BILLS91037 35,000,000.00 34,948,180.55 01/11/20245.33010/12/2023 34,954,255.00 A-1+912797GC5 10 5.563US TREASURY BILLS91039 35,000,000.00 34,948,229.17 01/11/20245.32510/13/2023 34,954,255.00 A-1+912797GC5 10 5.452US TREASURY BILLS91128 40,000,000.00 39,900,644.44 01/18/20245.26012/11/2023 39,906,120.00 A-1+912797GD3 17 5.499US TREASURY BILLS91053 5,000,000.00 4,983,912.50 01/23/20245.26510/25/2023 4,984,635.00 A-1+912797JA6 22 5.034US TREASURY BILLS90589 2,900,000.00 2,890,855.33 01/25/20244.73002/15/2023 2,890,229.90 A-1+912796ZY8 24 4.701US TREASURY BILLS90729 85,000.00 84,747.83 01/25/20244.45004/18/2023 84,713.64 A-1+912796ZY8 24 4.701US TREASURY BILLS90736 5,000,000.00 4,985,166.67 01/25/20244.45004/18/2023 4,983,155.00 A-1+912796ZY8 24 4.701US TREASURY BILLS90737 3,000,000.00 2,991,100.00 01/25/20244.45004/18/2023 2,989,893.00 A-1+912796ZY8 24 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91060 25,000,000.00 24,911,583.33 01/25/20245.30510/27/2023 24,915,775.00 A-1+912796ZY8 24 5.557US TREASURY BILLS91041 35,000,000.00 34,850,428.47 01/30/20245.30510/13/2023 34,855,905.00 A-1+912797JB4 29 5.457US TREASURY BILLS91103 35,000,000.00 34,806,411.11 02/08/20245.24011/30/2023 34,810,440.00 A-1+912797GM3 38 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91111 7,700,000.00 7,651,898.53 02/13/20245.23012/06/2023 7,652,583.40 A-1+912797JD0 43 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91112 2,700,000.00 2,683,133.25 02/13/20245.23012/06/2023 2,683,373.40 A-1+912797JD0 43 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91113 2,500,000.00 2,484,382.64 02/13/20245.23012/06/2023 2,484,605.00 A-1+912797JD0 43 5.478US TREASURY BILLS91085 40,000,000.00 39,737,750.00 02/15/20245.24511/17/2023 39,743,760.00 A-1+912797GN1 45 5.399US TREASURY BILLS91159 2,388,000.00 2,372,492.92 02/15/20245.19512/20/2023 2,372,702.47 A-1+912797GN1 45 5.399US TREASURY BILLS91160 612,000.00 608,025.83 02/15/20245.19512/20/2023 608,079.53 A-1+912797GN1 45 4.744US TREASURY BILLS90728 375,000.00 372,573.33 02/22/20244.48004/18/2023 372,212.25 A-1+912796Z28 52 4.766US TREASURY BILLS90743 5,000,000.00 4,967,500.00 02/22/20244.50004/19/2023 4,962,830.00 A-1+912796Z28 52 5.547US TREASURY BILLS91061 30,000,000.00 29,740,154.17 02/29/20245.28510/30/2023 29,745,570.00 A-1+912797GP6 59 5.468US TREASURY BILLS91104 8,500,000.00 8,427,073.54 02/29/20245.23512/01/2023 8,427,911.50 A-1+912797GP6 59 5.472US TREASURY BILLS91086 30,000,000.00 29,721,333.33 03/05/20245.22511/17/2023 29,727,150.00 A-1+912797JG3 64 5.447US TREASURY BILLS91152 30,000,000.00 29,682,754.17 03/14/20245.21512/15/2023 29,688,690.00 A-1+912797GX9 73 5.447US TREASURY BILLS91153 24,000,000.00 23,746,203.33 03/14/20245.21512/15/2023 23,750,952.00 A-1+912797GX9 73 4.802US TREASURY BILLS90727 296,000.00 293,033.42 03/21/20244.51004/18/2023 292,627.67 A-1+912797LL9 80 4.802US TREASURY BILLS90734 4,000,000.00 3,959,911.11 03/21/20244.51004/18/2023 3,954,428.00 A-1+912797LL9 80 4.802US TREASURY BILLS90735 3,500,000.00 3,464,922.22 03/21/20244.51004/18/2023 3,460,124.50 A-1+912797LL9 80 5.425US TREASURY BILLS91167 3,000,000.00 2,965,366.67 03/21/20245.19512/22/2023 2,965,821.00 A-1+912797LL9 80 5.458US TREASURY BILLS91115 35,000,000.00 34,569,451.39 03/26/20245.21012/06/2023 34,575,030.00 A-1+912797JK4 85 5.499US TREASURY BILLS91136 40,000,000.00 39,423,270.00 04/09/20245.24312/12/2023 39,434,200.00 A-1+912797JM0 99 5.441US TREASURY BILLS91172 20,000,000.00 19,674,183.33 04/23/20245.19012/29/2023 19,676,540.00 A-1+912797JP3 113 5.495US TREASURY BILLS91075 3,500,000.00 3,434,846.04 05/09/20245.19511/14/2023 3,436,058.50 A-1+912797HQ3 129 5.495US TREASURY BILLS91076 6,000,000.00 5,888,307.50 05/09/20245.19511/14/2023 5,890,386.00 A-1+912797HQ3 129 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 11 YTM 365 Page 7 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Treasury Bills 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91100 950,000.00 930,565.90 05/23/20245.15011/29/2023 930,889.80 A-1+912797HR1 143 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91101 350,000.00 342,840.07 05/23/20245.15011/29/2023 342,959.40 A-1+912797HR1 143 5.381US TREASURY BILLS91158 12,400,000.00 12,112,471.56 06/13/20245.09012/20/2023 12,116,412.00 A-1+912797FS1 164 5.527US TREASURY BILLS90999 250,000.00 241,104.72 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 241,877.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91000 2,500,000.00 2,411,047.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 2,418,770.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91001 7,000,000.00 6,750,932.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 6,772,556.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91002 30,000,000.00 28,932,566.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 29,025,240.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91003 12,500,000.00 12,055,236.11 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 12,093,850.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91004 200,000.00 192,883.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 193,501.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91005 300,000.00 289,325.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 290,252.40 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91006 200,000.00 192,883.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 193,501.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91007 2,000,000.00 1,928,837.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 1,935,016.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91008 350,000.00 337,546.61 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 338,627.80 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91009 7,000,000.00 6,750,932.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 6,772,556.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91010 500,000.00 482,209.45 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 483,754.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91011 7,000,000.00 6,750,932.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 6,772,556.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91012 250,000.00 241,104.72 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 241,877.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91013 2,700,000.00 2,603,931.00 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 2,612,271.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91014 9,000,000.00 8,679,769.99 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 8,707,572.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91015 10,000,000.00 9,644,188.88 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 9,675,080.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91016 1,500,000.00 1,446,628.34 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 1,451,262.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91017 4,200,000.00 4,050,559.33 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 4,063,533.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91018 600,000.00 578,651.33 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 580,504.80 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91019 300,000.00 289,325.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 290,252.40 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91020 300,000.00 289,325.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 290,252.40 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91021 1,500,000.00 1,446,628.34 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 1,451,262.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91022 1,000,000.00 964,418.89 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 967,508.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91023 900,000.00 867,977.00 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 870,757.20 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91024 250,000.00 241,104.72 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 241,877.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91025 2,100,000.00 2,025,279.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 2,031,766.80 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91026 200,000.00 192,883.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 193,501.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91027 400,000.00 385,767.56 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 387,003.20 A-1+912797GL5 248 740,762,819.07741,172,812.96748,756,000.00764,596,190.48Subtotal and Average 5.472 73 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 12 YTM 365 Page 8 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Callables 5.125FHLB - AGENCY90759 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/26/20245.12504/26/2023 9,998,300.00 AA+3130AVR87 25 5.000FNMA - AGENCY90559 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/26/20245.00001/26/2023 9,996,470.00 AA+3135GADZ1 25 5.000FNMA - AGENCY90693 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/10/20245.00004/10/2023 9,989,330.00 AA+3135GAGF2 100 5.000FNMA - AGENCY90723 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/12/20245.00004/13/2023 9,989,410.00 AA+3135GAGN5 102 5.125FNMA - AGENCY90760 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/26/20245.12504/26/2023 9,994,150.00 AA+3135GAGV7 116 5.200FHLMC - AGENCY90788 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/17/20245.20005/17/2023 9,980,920.00 AA+3134GYS60 168 0.500FHLMC - AGENCY85683 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 06/24/20240.50006/24/2020 19,560,200.00 AA+3134GVV96 175 5.330FNMA - AGENCY90858 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/28/20245.33006/28/2023 10,002,010.00 AA+3135GAHX2 179 5.400FNMA - AGENCY90887 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/19/20245.40007/19/2023 9,991,570.00 AA+3135GAJA0 200 3.320FHLB - AGENCY90261 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20243.32007/26/2022 9,901,310.00 AA+3130ASN47 207 3.570FHLB - AGENCY90267 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20243.57007/28/2022 9,915,080.00 AA+3130ASQR3 207 5.600FNMA - AGENCY90894 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20245.60007/26/2023 9,982,150.00 AA+3135GAJH5 207 4.800FNMA - AGENCY90566 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/30/20244.80001/30/2023 9,977,660.00 AA+3135GAEH0 211 4.050FHLMC - AGENCY90327 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/20/20244.05009/20/2022 9,924,140.00 AA+3134GX2E3 263 2.175FHLMC - AGENCY90098 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/27/20242.20003/28/2022 9,794,110.00 AA+3134GXPZ1 270 5.005FHLMC - AGENCY90519 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/27/20245.00012/27/2022 10,000,910.00 AA+3134GYA69 270 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86586 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/18/20241.00001/18/2022 9,706,380.00 AA+3130AQG64 291 5.080FHLMC - AGENCY90409 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/25/20245.08010/28/2022 9,983,690.00 AA+3134GX4M3 298 5.005FHLMC - AGENCY90568 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/30/20245.00001/30/2023 10,002,580.00 AA+3134GYDB5 303 1.200FHLB - AGENCY86559 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/23/20241.20012/23/2021 9,646,510.00 AA+3130AQBP7 357 0.956FHLB - AGENCY86574 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/30/20241.15012/30/2021 9,636,780.00 AA+3130AQ5X7 364 4.770FHLMC - AGENCY90567 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/30/20254.77001/30/2023 9,970,240.00 AA+3134GYFD9 395 4.800FHLMC - AGENCY90573 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/06/20254.80002/06/2023 9,971,390.00 AA+3134GYGH9 402 5.020FHLB - AGENCY90586 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/13/20255.02002/13/2023 9,994,730.00 AA+3130AUUQ5 409 2.190FFCB - AGENCY90078 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 03/21/20252.19003/21/2022 9,686,300.00 AA+3133ENSK7 445 3.100FHLMC - AGENCY90148 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/29/20253.10004/29/2022 9,784,360.00 AA+3134GXRS5 484 3.250FHLMC - AGENCY90226 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/27/20253.25006/29/2022 9,834,570.00 AA+3134GXXS8 543 0.700FFCB - AGENCY85691 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 06/30/20250.70006/30/2020 18,853,300.00 AA+3133ELQ49 546 0.650FNMA - AGENCY85693 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 06/30/20250.65006/30/2020 18,923,920.00 AA+3136G4XK4 546 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY90897 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/25/20255.50007/28/2023 9,991,440.00 AA+3134GYX31 571 0.750FHLB - AGENCY86191 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/29/20250.75004/29/2021 9,437,450.00 AA+3130AM4P4 575 5.504FHLMC - AGENCY90454 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/25/20255.50011/25/2022 9,974,960.00 AA+3134GY2W1 602 0.650FNMA - AGENCY85756 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/27/20250.65008/27/2020 9,402,510.00 AA+3136G4S87 604 4.665FNMA - AGENCY90581 4,400,000.00 4,363,193.39 08/28/20254.12502/08/2023 4,377,159.60 AA+3135G06V0 605 0.550FFCB - AGENCY85783 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/16/20250.55009/16/2020 9,361,540.00 AA+3133EL7K4 624 0.554FFCB - AGENCY85800 10,000,000.00 9,999,313.23 09/16/20250.55009/25/2020 9,361,540.00 AA+3133EL7K4 624 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 13 YTM 365 Page 9 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Callables 0.500FHLMC - AGENCY85866 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/29/20250.50009/29/2020 9,339,820.00 AA+3134GWVC7 637 0.550FHLMC - AGENCY85795 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/30/20250.55009/30/2020 9,347,100.00 AA+3134GWWT9 638 0.500FHLMC - AGENCY85805 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/30/20250.50009/30/2020 9,338,800.00 AA+3134GWUE4 638 0.600FHLMC - AGENCY85860 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/28/20250.60010/28/2020 9,317,410.00 AA+3134GW3Z7 666 0.600FNMA - AGENCY85871 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/29/20250.60010/29/2020 9,316,400.00 AA+3136G46N8 667 0.574FFCB - AGENCY85874 10,000,000.00 9,993,931.67 11/03/20250.54011/03/2020 9,300,110.00 AA+3133EMFR8 672 0.640FHLMC - AGENCY85928 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 11/24/20250.64011/24/2020 9,296,230.00 AA+3134GXEJ9 693 0.650FHLMC - AGENCY85937 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 11/26/20250.65011/30/2020 9,296,040.00 AA+3134GXFA7 695 0.650FNMA - AGENCY85989 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/17/20250.65012/17/2020 9,272,910.00 AA+3135G06K4 716 0.640FNMA - AGENCY86001 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/30/20250.64012/30/2020 9,258,140.00 AA+3135G06Q1 729 0.580FHLB - AGENCY86065 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/11/20260.58002/11/2021 9,243,750.00 AA+3130AKXB7 772 1.050FFCB - AGENCY86128 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 03/25/20261.05003/25/2021 9,297,970.00 AA+3133EMUK6 814 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86175 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/22/20261.00004/22/2021 9,295,840.00 AA+3130ALX25 842 1.100FHLB - AGENCY86176 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/22/20261.10004/22/2021 9,294,880.00 AA+3130ALXV1 842 1.050FHLB - AGENCY86246 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/10/20261.05006/10/2021 9,243,530.00 AA+3130AMMY5 891 0.900FFCB - AGENCY86252 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/15/20260.90006/15/2021 9,204,890.00 AA+3133EMH21 896 4.750FHLMC - AGENCY90511 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 06/18/20264.75012/20/2022 14,938,665.00 AA+3134GY6L1 899 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY90865 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/26/20265.50006/30/2023 9,988,170.00 AA+3134GYVD1 907 0.910FFCB - AGENCY86278 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/30/20260.91006/30/2021 9,194,410.00 AA+3133EMP22 911 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86276 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/30/20261.00006/30/2021 9,215,470.00 AA+3130AMYJ5 911 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86279 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/30/20261.00006/30/2021 9,215,470.00 AA+3130AN2Z2 911 5.375FNMA - AGENCY90877 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/10/20265.37507/10/2023 9,997,300.00 AA+3135GAJ69 921 1.250FHLB - AGENCY86442 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/28/20261.25010/28/2021 9,185,010.00 AA+3130APDQ5 1,031 1.500FHLB - AGENCY86511 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/02/20261.50012/02/2021 9,225,230.00 AA+3130APW43 1,066 1.600FFCB - AGENCY86538 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/14/20261.60012/14/2021 9,244,320.00 AA+3133ENHC7 1,078 1.600FFCB - AGENCY86550 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/14/20261.60012/16/2021 9,244,320.00 AA+3133ENHC7 1,078 1.750FHLB - AGENCY86603 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/28/20271.75001/28/2022 9,292,360.00 AA+3130AQJH7 1,123 1.853FFCB - AGENCY86604 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/08/20271.86002/08/2022 9,315,990.00 AA+3133ENNG1 1,134 2.000FHLB - AGENCY86605 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/25/20272.00002/25/2022 9,346,980.00 AA+3130AQRH8 1,151 2.770FHLB - AGENCY90041 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 03/04/20272.77003/04/2022 9,572,080.00 AA+3130AR2H3 1,158 3.375FHLB - AGENCY90146 9,900,000.00 9,900,000.00 04/28/20273.37504/28/2022 9,653,024.70 AA+3130ARPD7 1,213 5.300FHLMC - AGENCY90845 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/14/20275.30006/14/2023 9,962,140.00 AA+3134GYTW2 1,260 4.800FHLMC - AGENCY90517 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 06/21/20274.80012/21/2022 14,925,225.00 AA+3134GY6M9 1,267 5.000FHLB - AGENCY90340 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/14/20275.00009/28/2022 9,908,590.00 AA+3130AT3P0 1,352 5.106FHLMC - AGENCY90600 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/28/20285.10002/28/2023 9,972,980.00 AA+3134GYHZ8 1,519 5.200FHLMC - AGENCY90805 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 05/30/20285.20005/30/2023 9,971,330.00 AA+3134GYTE2 1,611 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 14 YTM 365 Page 10 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Callables 5.452FHLMC - AGENCY91034 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/11/20285.45010/11/2023 10,076,710.00 AA+3134H1EK5 1,653 5.430FFCB - AGENCY90883 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/14/20285.43007/14/2023 10,041,570.00 AA+3133EPPV1 1,656 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY90895 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20285.50007/26/2023 9,971,380.00 AA+3134GYXM9 1,668 5.630FHLMC - AGENCY90896 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 07/26/20285.63007/26/2023 14,977,680.00 AA+3134GYY97 1,668 6.000FHLMC - AGENCY90913 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/14/20286.00008/14/2023 9,981,750.00 AA+3134GYYY2 1,687 6.162FHLMC - AGENCY90932 10,000,000.00 9,995,341.67 08/28/20286.15008/28/2023 10,007,980.00 AA+3134GYZ96 1,701 5.250FHLMC - AGENCY90970 10,000,000.00 9,897,520.06 09/18/20285.00009/18/2023 10,021,080.00 AA+3134H1CF8 1,722 5.875FHLMC - AGENCY90996 8,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 09/27/20285.87509/29/2023 8,008,600.00 AA+3134H1ER0 1,731 5.750FHLMC - AGENCY91033 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/11/20285.75010/11/2023 10,032,583.30 AA+3134H1FG3 1,745 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY91047 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/20/20285.50010/20/2023 10,239,240.00 AA+3134H1HN6 1,754 4.950FHLMC - AGENCY91133 10,000,000.00 9,913,373.33 12/11/20284.75012/11/2023 9,977,500.00 AA+3134H1LJ0 1,806 867,062,673.35840,268,027.60867,300,000.00865,798,100.78Subtotal and Average 3.071 783 Corporate Note Callables 1.850TOYOTA MCC - CORP85501 13,150,000.00 13,143,010.34 02/13/20251.80002/13/2020 12,718,601.10 A+89236TGT6 409 0.765JOHNSON & JOHNS - CORP86327 15,295,000.00 15,241,133.09 09/01/20250.55008/12/2021 14,328,937.21 AAA478160CN2 609 4.616WALMART INC - CORP90341 11,000,000.00 10,876,839.85 09/09/20253.90009/29/2022 10,890,682.00 AA931142EW9 617 0.712APPLE INC - CORP86060 10,000,000.00 9,997,527.13 02/08/20260.70002/08/2021 9,261,690.00 AA+037833EB2 769 0.726APPLE INC - CORP86061 10,000,000.00 9,994,616.89 02/08/20260.70002/08/2021 9,261,690.00 AA+037833EB2 769 0.758APPLE INC - CORP86289 10,000,000.00 9,988,031.79 02/08/20260.70002/18/2021 9,261,690.00 AA+037833EB2 769 1.066AMAZON - CORP86223 10,000,000.00 9,984,776.56 05/12/20261.00005/12/2021 9,237,600.00 AA023135BX3 862 1.081AMAZON - CORP86224 5,000,000.00 4,990,704.75 05/12/20261.00005/13/2021 4,618,800.00 AA023135BX3 862 1.081AMAZON - CORP86226 5,000,000.00 4,990,699.58 05/12/20261.00005/14/2021 4,618,800.00 AA023135BX3 862 89,207,339.9884,198,490.3189,445,000.0089,202,068.62Subtotal and Average 1.452 691 Supranationals 2.353IBRD - SUPRA90099 10,000,000.00 9,997,576.60 03/28/20242.25003/30/2022 9,925,380.00 AAA45906M3C3 87 5.402IADB - SUPRA90903 10,000,000.00 9,924,198.88 07/01/20243.25008/02/2023 9,930,276.11 AAA4581X0EE4 182 4.704IFC - SUPRA90455 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/28/20244.70011/28/2022 9,950,520.00 AAA45950VRL2 240 0.447IFC - SUPRA86352 10,000,000.00 9,998,824.17 09/10/20240.43009/10/2021 9,657,190.00 AAA45950VQE9 253 4.687IFC - SUPRA90398 10,000,000.00 9,995,234.68 10/24/20244.62510/24/2022 9,956,820.00 AAA45950VRJ7 297 0.930IADB - SUPRA86499 10,000,000.00 9,999,088.89 11/29/20240.92011/29/2021 9,654,910.00 AAA45818WDK9 333 1.465IADB - SUPRA90006 10,000,000.00 9,992,976.86 02/10/20251.40002/10/2022 9,654,690.00 AAA45818WDQ6 406 0.655IFC - SUPRA86377 10,000,000.00 9,993,711.10 02/28/20250.60009/28/2021 9,523,350.00 AAA45950VQJ8 424 3.018IADB - SUPRA90149 10,000,000.00 9,997,787.04 04/29/20253.00004/29/2022 9,782,630.00 AAA45818WDN3 484 2.697IADB - SUPRA90199 10,000,000.00 9,993,600.00 06/03/20252.65006/03/2022 9,723,150.00 AAA45818WEB8 519 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 15 YTM 365 Page 11 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Supranationals 3.350IFC - SUPRA90307 10,000,000.00 9,996,887.00 08/25/20253.33008/25/2022 9,789,150.00 AAA45950VRG3 602 5.170IFC - SUPRA90509 10,000,000.00 9,995,047.75 10/17/20254.25012/13/2022 9,882,610.00 AAA45950VRP3 655 0.752IBRD - SUPRA86228 10,000,000.00 9,954,790.19 10/28/20250.50005/18/2021 9,319,380.00 AAA459058JL8 666 4.140IFC - SUPRA90518 10,000,000.00 9,983,442.92 12/22/20254.05012/22/2022 9,857,410.00 AAA45950VRQ1 721 4.866IFC - SUPRA90921 10,000,000.00 9,990,618.35 01/07/20264.55008/17/2023 10,053,785.56 AAA45950VSG2 737 0.580IFC - SUPRA86017 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/15/20260.58001/15/2021 9,234,530.00 AAA45950VPJ9 745 0.505IFC - SUPRA86039 15,000,000.00 14,983,097.83 02/05/20260.45002/05/2021 13,795,200.00 AAA45950VPL4 766 0.650IADB - SUPRA86079 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/20/20260.65002/24/2021 9,302,050.00 AAA45818WCZ7 781 0.914IADB - SUPRA86101 10,000,000.00 9,975,815.65 03/04/20260.80003/11/2021 9,313,620.00 AAA45818WDA1 793 0.969IADB - SUPRA86172 10,000,000.00 9,978,906.56 04/20/20260.87504/20/2021 9,271,130.00 AAA4581X0DV7 840 0.893IADB - SUPRA86188 10,000,000.00 9,995,975.28 04/20/20260.87504/28/2021 9,271,130.00 AAA4581X0DV7 840 0.900IFC - SUPRA86225 13,000,000.00 12,987,980.76 05/14/20260.86005/14/2021 11,940,058.00 AAA45950VPX8 864 0.818IADB - SUPRA86254 10,000,000.00 9,995,668.44 06/17/20260.80006/17/2021 9,205,990.00 AAA45818WDH6 898 4.540IADB - SUPRA90640 10,000,000.00 9,989,196.21 03/10/20274.50003/10/2023 10,095,990.00 AAA45818WEN2 1,164 4.035IADB - SUPRA90543 10,000,000.00 9,987,505.28 01/12/20284.00001/12/2023 9,982,220.00 AAA4581X0EH7 1,472 4.340IADB - SUPRA90847 10,000,000.00 9,984,405.56 06/15/20284.30006/15/2023 10,004,950.00 AAA45818WEP7 1,627 4.436IADB - SUPRA90848 10,000,000.00 9,946,533.33 06/15/20284.30006/15/2023 10,004,950.00 AAA45818WEP7 1,627 4.510IFC - SUPRA91094 10,000,000.00 9,995,653.68 11/27/20284.50011/27/2023 10,223,020.00 AAA45950VSM9 1,792 287,634,523.01278,306,089.67288,000,000.00287,620,045.85Subtotal and Average 2.543 745 Supranationals Callables 5.000IBRD - SUPRA90521 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/27/20275.00012/27/2022 10,000,000.00 AAA45906M3M1 1,456 4.500IBRD - SUPRA90853 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/26/20284.50006/26/2023 10,069,470.00 AAA45906M4E8 1,638 5.779IBRD - SUPRA90995 10,000,000.00 9,988,138.89 09/29/20285.75009/29/2023 10,044,390.00 AAA45906M4H1 1,733 29,988,138.8930,113,860.0030,000,000.0029,988,041.44Subtotal and Average 5.093 1,609 Supranational Discounts 5.404IBRD - SUPRA DISC91064 25,000,000.00 24,989,000.00 01/04/20245.28011/01/2023 24,978,300.00 A-1+459052RJ7 3 5.516IBRD - SUPRA DISC91043 20,000,000.00 19,979,388.89 01/08/20245.30010/17/2023 19,971,060.00 A-1+459052RN8 7 5.554IBRD - SUPRA DISC91029 35,000,000.00 34,922,416.67 01/16/20245.32010/04/2023 34,908,825.00 A-1+459052RW8 15 5.483IBRD - SUPRA DISC91089 30,000,000.00 29,681,841.67 03/14/20245.23011/20/2023 29,672,880.00 A-1+459052UG9 73 5.479IBRD - SUPRA DISC91096 40,000,000.00 39,552,544.45 03/18/20245.23011/28/2023 39,540,880.00 A-1+459052UL8 77 5.381IADB - SUPRA DISC91135 40,000,000.00 39,460,600.00 04/03/20245.22012/12/2023 39,453,320.00 A-1+45818KVC3 93 5.458IBRD - SUPRA DISC91146 40,000,000.00 39,387,555.56 04/16/20245.20012/14/2023 39,379,320.00 A-1+459052VR4 106 5.459IBRD - SUPRA DISC91154 40,000,000.00 39,352,888.89 04/22/20245.20012/18/2023 39,345,120.00 A-1+459052VX1 112 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 16 YTM 365 Page 12 Par Value Book Value Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 267,326,236.13267,249,705.00270,000,000.00263,806,139.70Subtotal and Average 5.465 68 5,793,970,007.70 5,943,641,404.12 4.729 2885,856,286,878.29 5,903,757,414.39Total and Average Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 17 YTM 365 Page 13 Par Value Book Value Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Cash Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 0.00 5,793,970,007.70 5,943,641,404.12 4.729 288 0Average Balance 5,856,286,878.29 5,903,757,414.39Total Cash and Investments Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 18 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES B.1. PFM Notes: 1. Statements are generated by the SymPro Treasury Management Software system beginning first quarter of calendar year 2022. 2. Market pricing data are obtained from Interactive Data Corporation/ICE. YTM 365 Page 1 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Negotiable CDs 5.688NATIXIS NY BRANCH - YCD90974 550,000.00 550,000.00 09/18/20265.61009/20/2023 560,115.05 A63873QP65 991 550,000.00560,115.05550,000.00550,000.00Subtotal and Average 5.688 991 Corporate Notes 5.088AUST & NZ BANKING GRP - CORP90490 310,000.00 310,000.00 12/08/20255.08812/08/2022 311,864.96 AA-05254JAA8 707 5.079COMMONWLTH BK AUSTR NY - CORP90535 535,000.00 535,000.00 01/10/20255.07901/10/2023 535,516.81 AA-20271RAQ3 375 5.316COMMONWLTH BK AUSTR NY - CORP90642 350,000.00 350,000.00 03/13/20265.31603/13/2023 355,247.90 AA-20271RAR1 802 1.480COOPERATIVE RABOBANK - CORP86583 325,000.00 324,659.58 01/10/20251.37501/12/2022 312,610.68 A+21688AAS1 375 3.899COOPERATIVE RABOBANK - CORP90303 255,000.00 254,962.37 08/22/20243.87508/22/2022 252,465.56 A+21688AAU6 234 3.046GOLDMAN SACHS GRP - CORP90066 175,000.00 174,983.99 03/15/20243.00003/15/2022 174,012.83 BBB+38141GZP2 74 3.752HSBC USA INC - CORP90186 550,000.00 549,995.63 05/24/20243.75005/24/2022 545,862.35 A-40428HTA0 144 0.492JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP86245 185,000.00 184,966.50 06/07/20240.45006/10/2021 181,045.26 A24422EVQ9 158 1.266JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP86581 110,000.00 109,982.34 01/10/20251.25001/10/2022 106,098.19 A24422EVY2 375 3.408JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP90200 170,000.00 169,981.36 06/06/20253.40006/06/2022 167,115.61 A24422EWF2 522 4.771JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP90835 190,000.00 189,910.51 06/08/20264.75006/08/2023 191,275.09 N/A24422EWX3 889 3.500NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BK - CORP90205 400,000.00 400,000.00 06/09/20253.50006/09/2022 393,142.40 AA-63254ABD9 525 4.966NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BK - CORP90538 480,000.00 480,000.00 01/12/20264.96601/12/2023 483,323.52 AA-63253QAA2 742 0.518PACCAR FINANCIAL - CORP86307 105,000.00 104,988.55 08/09/20240.50008/09/2021 101,914.58 A+69371RR40 221 2.859PACCAR FINANCIAL - CORP90115 300,000.00 299,967.07 04/07/20252.85004/07/2022 293,160.60 A+69371RR73 462 4.474PACCAR FINANCIAL - CORP90670 150,000.00 149,924.72 03/30/20264.45003/30/2023 149,725.95 A+69371RS49 819 5.080RABOBANK - CORP90889 500,000.00 500,000.00 07/17/20265.08007/20/2023 506,367.00 N/A21684LGS5 928 2.532TOYOTA MCC - CORP90080 100,000.00 99,993.03 03/22/20242.50003/22/2022 99,346.20 A+89236TJX4 81 4.823TOYOTA MCC - CORP90539 300,000.00 299,933.70 01/10/20254.80001/12/2023 300,069.00 A+89236TKN4 375 4.471TOYOTA MCC - CORP90792 190,000.00 189,912.55 05/18/20264.45005/18/2023 189,688.40 A+89236TKT1 868 5.113WELLS FARGO & COMPANY - CORP90669 325,000.00 310,491.43 04/22/20263.00003/30/2023 311,314.90 BBB+949746RW3 842 5,989,653.335,961,167.796,005,000.005,989,375.80Subtotal and Average 4.004 528 CD Medium Term 4.135CREDIT AG NY - MT CD90302 550,000.00 550,000.00 08/16/20244.10008/19/2022 544,018.20 A+22536AZR8 228 5.530NORDEA BANK ABP NY - MT CD90421 725,000.00 725,000.00 11/03/20255.53011/03/2022 733,641.28 AA-65558UYF3 672 5.678TORONTO DOM NY - MT CD90413 725,000.00 725,000.00 10/27/20255.60010/31/2022 734,284.35 AA-89115B6K1 665 2,000,000.002,011,943.832,000,000.002,000,000.00Subtotal and Average 5.200 547 Treasury Coupon Securities 0.427US TREASURY NOTES86242 300,000.00 302,917.09 11/30/20241.50006/07/2021 290,976.60 AA+912828YV6 334 1.823US TREASURY NOTES90012 1,150,000.00 1,145,957.03 02/15/20251.50002/15/2022 1,109,794.85 AA+91282CDZ1 411 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Report Ver. 7.3.11 Page 19 YTM 365 Page 2 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Treasury Coupon Securities 2.132US TREASURY NOTES90076 800,000.00 796,460.49 03/15/20251.75003/18/2022 773,031.20 AA+91282CED9 439 2.658US TREASURY NOTES90107 275,000.00 267,045.51 04/30/20250.37504/06/2022 260,240.20 AA+912828ZL7 485 2.940US TREASURY NOTES90151 800,000.00 774,095.33 04/30/20250.37505/06/2022 757,062.40 AA+912828ZL7 485 3.000US TREASURY NOTES90153 1,250,000.00 1,248,024.72 04/30/20252.87505/05/2022 1,222,705.00 AA+9128284M9 485 2.858US TREASURY NOTES90201 2,200,000.00 2,196,879.37 05/15/20252.75006/06/2022 2,147,921.60 AA+91282CEQ0 500 2.921US TREASURY NOTES90241 750,000.00 749,520.21 06/15/20252.87507/11/2022 733,008.00 AA+91282CEU1 531 3.060US TREASURY NOTES90269 800,000.00 799,296.79 07/15/20253.00008/08/2022 782,531.20 AA+91282CEY3 561 3.544US TREASURY NOTES90316 1,400,000.00 1,391,018.49 08/18/20253.12509/07/2022 1,372,109.20 AA+91282CFE6 595 4.138US TREASURY NOTES90492 725,000.00 729,567.46 11/15/20254.50012/08/2022 727,435.28 AA+91282CFW6 684 4.051US TREASURY NOTES90507 350,000.00 352,740.68 11/15/20254.50012/13/2022 351,175.65 AA+91282CFW6 684 4.089US TREASURY NOTES90527 130,000.00 130,120.87 12/15/20254.00012/29/2022 129,504.24 AA+91282CGA3 714 3.917US TREASURY NOTES90571 1,425,000.00 1,423,845.93 01/15/20263.87502/02/2023 1,414,145.78 AA+91282CGE5 745 4.083US TREASURY NOTES90584 800,000.00 796,826.27 01/15/20263.87502/09/2023 793,906.40 AA+91282CGE5 745 4.640US TREASURY NOTES90621 1,000,000.00 987,407.35 02/15/20264.00003/07/2023 995,430.00 AA+91282CGL9 776 3.865US TREASURY NOTES90751 280,000.00 279,311.05 04/15/20263.75004/24/2023 277,396.84 AA+91282CGV7 835 3.868US TREASURY NOTES90770 1,475,000.00 1,434,033.18 02/28/20262.50005/03/2023 1,423,490.05 AA+9128286F2 789 3.781US TREASURY NOTES90791 750,000.00 749,493.71 04/15/20263.75005/18/2023 743,027.25 AA+91282CGV7 835 4.048US TREASURY NOTES90795 1,425,000.00 1,423,573.13 02/15/20264.00005/23/2023 1,418,487.75 AA+91282CGL9 776 3.985US TREASURY NOTES90827 1,825,000.00 1,810,429.84 05/15/20263.62506/05/2023 1,803,826.35 AA+91282CHB0 865 4.278US TREASURY NOTES90841 1,600,000.00 1,581,933.16 04/15/20263.75006/13/2023 1,585,124.80 AA+91282CGV7 835 4.375US TREASURY NOTES90866 1,250,000.00 1,242,876.97 06/15/20264.12506/30/2023 1,237,451.18 AA+91282CHH7 896 4.776US TREASURY NOTES90867 750,000.00 744,716.54 05/31/20254.25006/30/2023 747,246.00 AA+91282CHD6 516 4.555US TREASURY NOTES90871 75,000.00 73,464.94 05/15/20263.62507/05/2023 74,129.85 AA+91282CHB0 865 4.568US TREASURY NOTES90907 1,475,000.00 1,476,049.10 07/15/20264.50008/03/2023 1,492,140.05 AA+91282CHM6 926 4.581US TREASURY NOTES90908 1,000,000.00 1,000,529.48 07/15/20264.50008/04/2023 1,011,742.65 AA+91282CHM6 926 4.461US TREASURY NOTES90912 150,000.00 150,627.20 07/15/20264.50008/11/2023 151,889.79 AA+91282CHM6 926 4.732US TREASURY NOTES90961 575,000.00 571,859.00 08/15/20264.37509/11/2023 580,709.13 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.705US TREASURY NOTES90964 1,250,000.00 1,244,141.51 08/15/20264.37509/12/2023 1,262,559.76 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.723US TREASURY NOTES90968 1,250,000.00 1,244,032.58 08/15/20264.37509/15/2023 1,263,005.58 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.712US TREASURY NOTES90972 625,000.00 622,469.74 08/15/20264.37509/19/2023 631,800.00 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.893US TREASURY NOTES91030 1,250,000.00 1,244,792.41 09/15/20264.62510/05/2023 1,270,607.76 AA+91282CHY0 988 4.728US TREASURY NOTES91074 1,000,000.00 1,000,609.70 10/15/20264.62511/10/2023 1,018,129.52 AA+91282CJC6 1,018 4.846US TREASURY NOTES91080 1,500,000.00 1,491,251.36 11/15/20264.62511/15/2023 1,523,671.50 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 4.311US TREASURY NOTES91127 1,850,000.00 1,871,556.33 11/15/20264.62512/11/2023 1,885,306.46 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 4.507US TREASURY NOTES91139 1,700,000.00 1,711,110.35 11/15/20264.62512/12/2023 1,732,659.77 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 4.426US TREASURY NOTES91151 750,000.00 756,808.52 11/15/20264.62512/15/2023 764,694.61 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 20 YTM 365 Page 3 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 37,817,393.3937,760,074.2537,960,000.0037,274,957.98Subtotal and Average 3.965 791 Corporate Note Callables 3.056AMAZON - CORP90132 145,000.00 144,901.38 04/13/20253.00004/13/2022 141,871.05 AA023135CE4 468 1.143AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP86485 325,000.00 327,514.70 07/30/20242.50011/23/2021 319,268.95 BBB+025816CG2 211 1.143AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP86486 100,000.00 100,773.75 07/30/20242.50011/23/2021 98,236.60 BBB+025816CG2 211 1.530BANK OF AMERICA - CORP86513 500,000.00 500,000.00 12/06/20251.53012/06/2021 480,674.50 A-06051GKE8 705 5.526BANK OF AMERICA - CORP90924 350,000.00 350,000.00 08/18/20265.52608/18/2023 356,460.65 A+06428CAA2 960 0.872BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP86433 355,000.00 354,937.18 10/25/20240.85010/25/2021 342,741.14 A06406RAX5 298 0.646CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP86353 370,000.00 369,882.48 09/13/20240.60009/14/2021 358,192.93 A14913R2P1 256 4.809CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP90533 175,000.00 174,970.63 01/06/20264.80001/06/2023 175,999.78 A14913R3B1 736 3.458CINTAS CORP - CORP90150 160,000.00 159,984.33 05/01/20253.45005/03/2022 157,128.00 A-17252MAP5 486 0.981CITIBANK NA - CORP86192 160,000.00 160,000.00 05/01/20250.98105/04/2021 157,284.64 BBB+172967MX6 486 5.864CITIBANK NA - CORP90998 255,000.00 255,000.00 09/29/20255.86409/29/2023 259,213.88 A+17325FBA5 637 5.488CITIBANK NA - CORP91106 250,000.00 250,000.00 12/04/20265.48812/04/2023 254,499.50 A+17325FBC1 1,068 2.014CITIGROUP INC - CORP86599 85,000.00 85,000.00 01/25/20262.01401/25/2022 81,677.61 BBB+17327CAN3 755 5.260COMCAST - CORP90423 100,000.00 99,983.35 11/07/20255.25011/07/2022 101,057.80 A-20030NDZ1 676 3.132COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP90273 120,000.00 119,940.63 08/15/20253.10008/09/2022 117,366.24 AA+194162AM5 592 4.842COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP90601 185,000.00 184,844.96 03/02/20264.80003/01/2023 187,333.59 AA-194162AQ6 791 4.370EXXON MOBIL - CORP90570 550,000.00 535,344.43 03/01/20263.04302/01/2023 534,089.60 AA-30231GAT9 790 2.760HOME DEPOT - CORP90103 60,000.00 59,955.59 04/15/20252.70003/28/2022 58,519.20 A437076CM2 470 3.997HOME DEPOT - CORP90322 75,000.00 74,984.59 09/15/20254.00009/19/2022 74,305.35 A437076CR1 623 5.037HOME DEPOT - CORP91107 155,000.00 154,669.57 09/30/20264.95012/04/2023 157,220.22 A437076CV2 1,003 0.773AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP86351 100,000.00 99,986.30 08/09/20240.75009/09/2021 97,207.40 A-02665WDY4 221 1.527AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP86590 300,000.00 299,918.37 01/13/20251.50001/13/2022 289,433.40 A-02665WEA5 378 5.295AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP90876 155,000.00 154,840.07 07/07/20265.25007/07/2023 157,948.10 A-02665WEK3 918 4.859HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL - CORP90417 325,000.00 324,976.95 11/01/20244.85011/02/2022 323,864.12 A438516CH7 305 4.000IBM - CORP90265 540,000.00 540,000.00 07/27/20254.00007/27/2022 534,032.46 A-459200KS9 573 4.600INTEL CORP-CORP90554 375,000.00 370,022.92 07/29/20253.70001/26/2023 369,043.50 A+458140AS9 575 0.563JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP86067 245,000.00 245,000.00 02/16/20250.56302/16/2021 243,357.52 A-46647PBY1 412 0.824JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP86236 190,000.00 190,000.00 06/01/20250.82406/01/2021 185,931.72 A-46647PCH7 517 2.595JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP90031 400,000.00 400,000.00 02/24/20252.59502/24/2022 387,369.60 A-46647PCV6 420 4.080JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP90140 225,000.00 225,000.00 04/26/20264.08004/26/2022 221,339.25 A-46647PCZ7 846 4.739LINDE INC CT - CORP90481 530,000.00 529,632.18 12/05/20254.70012/05/2022 530,429.30 A53522KAB9 704 5.055LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP90399 120,000.00 119,794.35 10/15/20254.95010/24/2022 120,935.52 A-539830BU2 653 2.630MORGAN STANLEY - CORP90018 450,000.00 450,000.00 02/18/20262.63002/18/2022 435,519.00 BBB+61747YEM3 779 0.373NATIONAL RURAL - CORP86059 140,000.00 139,996.69 02/08/20240.35002/08/2021 139,242.18 A-63743HEU2 38 1.876NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90002 105,000.00 104,998.84 02/07/20251.87502/07/2022 101,359.13 A-63743HFC1 403 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 21 YTM 365 Page 4 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Corporate Note Callables 3.458NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90152 70,000.00 69,991.17 06/15/20253.45005/04/2022 68,540.71 A-63743HFE7 531 5.499NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90415 70,000.00 69,942.76 10/30/20255.45010/31/2022 70,700.77 A-63743HFF4 668 4.473NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90585 60,000.00 59,969.71 03/13/20264.45002/09/2023 59,909.10 A-63743HFH0 802 5.612NATIONAL RURAL - CORP91067 115,000.00 114,961.93 11/13/20265.60011/02/2023 118,008.17 A-63743HFK3 1,047 4.759PEPSICO INC - CORP90534 300,000.00 294,560.63 07/17/20253.50001/09/2023 295,123.20 A+713448CY2 563 4.571PEPSICO INC - CORP90590 225,000.00 224,907.75 02/13/20264.55002/15/2023 225,899.33 A+713448FQ6 774 5.671PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP90411 240,000.00 240,000.00 10/28/20255.67110/28/2022 239,877.36 A-693475BH7 666 4.758PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP90548 45,000.00 45,000.00 01/26/20274.75801/24/2023 44,645.63 A-693475BL8 1,121 0.767CHARLES SCHWAB - CORP86114 245,000.00 244,991.27 03/18/20240.75003/18/2021 242,483.61 A808513BN4 77 1.746STATE STREET CORP - CORP86606 150,000.00 150,000.00 02/06/20261.74602/07/2022 144,136.80 A857477BR3 767 2.129STATE STREET CORP - CORP90001 75,000.00 76,239.10 03/30/20262.90102/07/2022 72,868.95 A857477BM4 819 2.383STATE STREET CORP - CORP90028 400,000.00 404,407.35 03/30/20262.90102/22/2022 388,634.40 A857477BM4 819 5.751STATE STREET CORP - CORP90422 105,000.00 105,000.00 11/04/20265.75111/04/2022 106,621.62 A857477BX0 1,038 4.857STATE STREET CORP - CORP90557 45,000.00 45,000.00 01/26/20264.85701/26/2023 44,786.84 A857477BZ5 756 1.041TARGET CORP - CORP86498 250,000.00 253,024.46 07/01/20243.50011/29/2021 247,814.25 A87612EBD7 182 4.260TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP90266 235,000.00 235,000.00 07/28/20264.26007/28/2022 230,120.93 A-89788MAH5 939 5.900TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP90412 250,000.00 250,000.00 10/28/20265.90010/28/2022 252,054.25 A-89788MAJ1 1,031 0.585UNITED HEALTH - CORP86229 260,000.00 259,966.33 05/15/20240.55005/19/2021 255,302.58 A+91324PEB4 135 5.150UNITED HEALTH - CORP90410 80,000.00 79,995.65 10/15/20255.15010/28/2022 80,872.40 A+91324PEN8 653 0.626UNILEVER CAPITAL - CORP86325 125,000.00 125,000.00 08/12/20240.62608/12/2021 121,372.75 A+904764BN6 224 3.925WALMART INC - CORP90321 285,000.00 284,887.69 09/09/20253.90009/09/2022 282,167.67 AA931142EW9 617 5.482WELLS FARGO & COMPANY - CORP90910 250,000.00 249,811.15 08/07/20265.45008/09/2023 254,073.25 A+94988J6D4 949 12,539,511.1912,396,168.0012,555,000.0012,535,643.86Subtotal and Average 3.314 606 Supranationals 4.406IADB - SUPRA91140 750,000.00 749,373.23 02/01/20274.37512/12/2023 756,390.75 AAA4581X0EM6 1,127 749,373.23756,390.75750,000.00483,463.48Subtotal and Average 4.406 1,127 Pass Through Securities (GNMA/CMO) 5.530ALLYA - ABS90886 165,000.00 164,971.87 05/15/20285.46007/19/2023 166,894.70 N/A02007WAC2 1,596 5.037BofA CC - ABS91148 145,000.00 144,980.53 11/15/20284.98012/14/2023 146,687.22 AAA05522RDH8 1,780 0.509CARMAX - ABS85858 26,675.57 26,641.45 08/15/20250.50010/21/2020 26,395.85 AAA14316HAC6 592 0.348CARMAX - ABS86024 36,543.46 36,516.78 12/15/20250.34001/27/2021 35,872.19 AAA14316NAC3 714 0.529CARMAX - ABS86173 102,063.55 102,008.60 02/17/20260.52004/21/2021 99,799.37 AAA14314QAC8 778 0.557CARMAX - ABS86290 276,544.63 276,499.14 06/15/20260.55007/28/2021 267,930.54 AAA14317DAC4 896 3.522CARMAX - ABS90145 98,181.31 98,166.38 02/16/20273.49004/28/2022 96,726.26 AAA14317HAC5 1,142 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 22 YTM 365 Page 5 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Pass Through Securities (GNMA/CMO) 5.410CARMAX - ABS90414 380,000.00 379,910.89 08/16/20275.34010/31/2022 381,105.42 AAA14318UAD3 1,323 0.347CAPITAL ONE - ABS86503 450,000.00 449,937.99 11/15/20261.04011/30/2021 434,061.45 AAA14041NFY2 1,049 2.820CAPITAL ONE - ABS90102 225,000.00 224,983.04 03/15/20272.80003/30/2022 219,295.13 AAA14041NFZ9 1,169 3.521CAPITAL ONE - ABS90210 195,000.00 194,968.84 05/15/20273.49006/14/2022 191,343.56 AAA14041NGA3 1,230 0.760COPAR - ABS86438 160,103.55 160,100.52 09/15/20260.77010/27/2021 154,951.58 AAA14044CAC6 988 4.351DCENT 2023 A1 A MTGE - ABS90706 225,000.00 224,986.95 03/15/20284.31004/11/2023 223,428.83 N/A254683CY9 1,535 0.580DISCOVER CARD ABS - ABS86368 280,000.00 279,940.05 09/15/20260.58009/27/2021 270,878.16 AAA254683CP8 988 3.510DISCOVER CARD ABS - ABS90274 205,000.00 204,974.56 07/15/20273.56008/09/2022 200,959.04 AAA254683CW3 1,291 3.036FHMS - MBS90187 725,000.00 729,644.53 05/25/20253.32905/24/2022 704,939.47 N/A3137BKRJ1 510 2.907FHMS - MBS90193 636,278.19 637,123.24 08/25/20243.06405/31/2022 626,455.33 AA+3137FBTA4 237 3.478FHMS - MBS90248 701,775.35 693,332.11 01/25/20253.02307/18/2022 686,431.73 AA+3137BHXJ1 390 3.493FHMS - MBS90260 550,000.00 543,640.63 11/25/20253.15107/26/2022 535,068.60 N/A3137BMTX4 694 3.447FHMS - MBS90270 425,000.00 421,829.10 03/25/20253.20508/08/2022 415,643.20 N/A3137BJP64 449 3.330FHMS - MBS90272 575,000.00 568,374.02 12/25/20252.99508/09/2022 556,891.53 N/A3137BN6G4 724 3.512FHMS - MBS90275 325,000.00 322,638.67 09/25/20253.30808/10/2022 317,009.88 AA+3137BM7C4 633 3.485FHMS - MBS90300 750,000.00 739,423.83 07/25/20253.01008/16/2022 729,312.75 AA+3137BLMZ8 571 3.758FHMS - MBS90315 494,659.53 488,147.80 10/25/20243.17109/02/2022 486,284.45 N/A3137BFE98 298 4.188FHMS - MBS90329 550,000.00 539,687.50 09/25/20243.24109/20/2022 541,704.90 AA+3137BEVH4 268 4.989FHMS - MBS90605 300,000.00 282,515.63 01/25/20262.74503/06/2023 289,101.30 N/A3137BNGT5 755 6.932FHMS - MBS90622 300,000.00 278,976.56 07/25/20262.57003/07/2023 286,480.80 N/A3137BRQJ7 936 5.113FHMS - MBS90633 347,710.68 336,790.39 08/25/20253.75003/09/2023 341,613.92 AA+3137FJXQ7 602 4.101FHMS - MBS90726 525,000.00 501,108.40 08/25/20262.65304/17/2023 500,938.20 N/A3137BSP72 967 4.308FHMS - MBS90796 350,000.00 332,800.78 07/25/20262.57005/23/2023 334,227.60 N/A3137BRQJ7 936 4.306FHMS - MBS90798 254,618.86 246,781.37 11/25/20263.34705/24/2023 246,771.25 N/A3137BTUM1 1,059 5.303FHMS - MBS91036 400,000.00 371,140.63 07/25/20262.28210/11/2023 380,211.20 AA+3137FNWX4 936 5.600FHMS - MBS91049 350,000.00 333,457.03 02/25/20263.20810/23/2023 340,350.15 AA+3137FLN34 786 5.156FHMS - MBS91088 600,000.00 568,289.06 09/25/20263.12011/20/2023 571,552.20 AAA3137BSRE5 998 5.657FITAT - ABS90929 510,000.00 509,968.38 08/15/20285.53008/23/2023 517,074.21 AAA31680EAD3 1,688 4.578FNMA - MBS90384 371,890.17 350,855.13 02/25/20262.70210/12/2022 358,059.57 AA+3136ARTE8 786 1.299FORDO - ABS86601 74,589.52 74,580.66 06/15/20261.29001/24/2022 72,585.75 AAA345286AC2 896 4.700FORDO - ABS90673 185,000.00 184,980.70 02/15/20284.65003/31/2023 184,316.43 AAA344928AD8 1,506 0.460GMCAR - ABS85744 10,979.96 10,922.76 04/16/20250.45008/19/2020 10,943.21 N/A362590AC5 471 0.682GMCAR - ABS86430 133,280.49 133,277.09 09/16/20260.68010/21/2021 128,812.66 N/A362554AC1 989 1.267GMCAR - ABS86592 141,771.98 141,759.66 11/16/20261.26001/19/2022 137,619.34 AAA380146AC4 1,050 3.668GMCAR - ABS90242 120,000.00 119,999.17 04/16/20273.64007/13/2022 118,061.52 N/A36265WAD5 1,201 4.513GMCAR - ABS90719 120,000.00 119,996.70 02/16/20284.47004/12/2023 119,227.92 AAA362583AD8 1,507 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 23 YTM 365 Page 6 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Pass Through Securities (GNMA/CMO) 5.858GMCAR - ABS91035 160,000.00 159,967.14 08/16/20285.78010/11/2023 164,057.12 AAA379930AD2 1,689 0.892HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES - ABS86545 153,241.48 153,209.17 01/21/20260.88011/24/2021 148,698.48 N/A43815GAC3 751 5.745HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES - ABS91070 85,000.00 84,985.03 06/21/20285.67011/08/2023 86,776.08 AAA438123AC5 1,633 0.377HAROT - ABS85801 2,529.48 2,511.12 10/18/20240.37009/29/2020 2,522.58 AAA43813KAC6 291 1.895HAROT - ABS90025 190,301.21 190,272.59 05/15/20261.88002/23/2022 185,224.16 AAA43815BAC4 865 4.713HAROT - ABS90806 185,000.00 184,970.03 11/15/20274.93005/30/2023 185,866.54 AAA437927AC0 1,414 0.385HART - ABS86185 49,164.35 49,146.47 09/15/20250.38004/28/2021 48,468.72 AAA44933LAC7 623 2.232HART - ABS90067 407,858.94 407,843.24 10/15/20262.22003/16/2022 398,578.11 AAA448977AD0 1,018 5.108HDMOT - ABS90593 120,000.00 119,987.92 12/15/20275.05002/23/2023 119,094.95 N/A41285JAD0 1,444 0.738HYUNDAI AUTO - ABS86480 117,387.39 117,361.19 05/15/20260.74011/17/2021 114,200.09 AAA44935FAD6 865 4.558MERCEDES BENZ AUTO - ABS90553 95,000.00 94,988.60 11/15/20274.51001/25/2023 94,392.86 AAA58770AAC7 1,414 4.511NAROT - ABS90343 200,000.00 199,958.62 05/17/20274.46009/28/2022 198,518.60 AAA65480JAC4 1,232 5.147TAOT 2023 B A3 - MBS90797 260,000.00 259,985.47 02/15/20284.71005/23/2023 259,601.16 N/A891941AD8 1,506 0.699TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS86475 159,167.78 159,164.39 04/15/20260.71011/15/2021 154,442.09 AAA89238JAC9 835 4.173TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS90299 135,000.00 134,977.44 04/15/20273.76008/16/2022 132,739.83 AAA89231CAD9 1,200 4.675TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS90565 170,000.00 169,999.92 09/15/20274.63001/30/2023 168,975.07 AAA891940AC2 1,353 1.024VOLKSWAGEN AUTO LOAN - ABS86533 195,924.03 195,916.35 06/22/20261.02012/13/2021 190,715.98 AAA92868KAC7 903 0.633WOART - ABS85684 5,306.08 5,288.44 05/15/20250.63006/24/2020 5,294.62 AAA98163WAC0 500 0.817WOART - ABS86452 187,982.39 187,956.79 10/15/20260.81011/03/2021 182,435.97 AAA98163KAC6 1,018 16,430,119.0416,294,621.3816,676,529.9316,468,602.26Subtotal and Average 3.608 886 Municipal Bonds 1.258FLORIDA ST - MUNI85786 205,000.00 205,000.00 07/01/20251.25809/16/2020 194,510.15 AA341271AD6 547 3.661MASS. CMNWLTH - MUNI90312 380,000.00 380,000.00 01/15/20253.66008/30/2022 375,668.76 N/A576004GY5 380 0.897NJ TPK AUTH - MUNI86035 165,000.00 165,000.00 01/01/20250.89702/04/2021 158,253.98 A+646140DN0 366 750,000.00728,432.89750,000.00750,000.00Subtotal and Average 2.396 423 76,052,043.39 77,246,529.93 3.819 75576,468,913.94 76,826,050.18Total and Average Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 24 YTM 365 Page 7 Par Value Book Value Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Cash Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 0.00 76,052,043.39 77,246,529.93 3.819 755 0Average Balance 76,468,913.94 76,826,050.18Total Cash and Investments Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 25 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES B.2. STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AS OF DECEMBER 30, 2023 . CALIFORNIA STATE LOCAL STATE CONTROLLER ACCOUNT ESTIMATED1 AGENCY INVESTMENT ACCOUNTS ACCOUNT NUMBER BALANCE FAIR VALUE ACALANES UNION HIGH SCHOOL 75-07-010 13,494,283.42 13,407,152.60 ANTIOCH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-005 923,152.60 917,191.92 BRENTWOOD UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-013 8,678,925.24 8,622,886.56 BYRON UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-017 184,938.21 183,744.09 CANYON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-018 162,866.54 161,814.93 CCC REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 65-07-015 0.04 0.04 CONTRA COSTA COMMUNITY COLLEGE 75-07-001 700,843.12 696,317.87 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL INSURANCE GROUP 35-07-001 2,493,634.52 2,477,533.45 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT 70-07-001 58,100,000.00 57,724,855.91 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION 75-07-007 1,432,426.99 1,423,178.00 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 99-07-000 75,000,000.00 74,515,734.83 CROCKETT COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 16-07-004 4,684,182.78 4,653,937.63 DELTA DIABLO SANITATION DISTRICT 70-07-003 81,107.65 80,583.95 EAST CONTRA COSTA REG FEE & FINANCING AUTH 40-07-006 1,122,558.97 1,115,310.75 KENSINGTON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 17-07-011 2,527,668.29 2,511,347.47 KENSINGTON POLICE PROTECTION & COMMUNITY 16-07-003 666,952.59 662,646.16 SERVICES DISTRICT LAFAYETTE SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-012 1,839,180.19 1,827,304.84 MARTINEZ UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-011 21,738,049.89 21,597,690.15 MORAGA ORINDA FIRE DISTRICT 17-07-003 913,832.11 907,931.62 MORAGA SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-016 2,987.33 2,968.04 MT DIABLO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-008 3,827,710.42 3,802,995.40 MT VIEW SANITARY DISTRICT 70-07-008 11,070,924.40 10,999,440.89 OAKLEY UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-009 276,228.67 274,445.10 ORINDA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-015 2,641,732.12 2,624,674.80 PITTSBURG UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-002 39,285.30 39,031.64 RECLAMATION DISTRICT 799 60-07-001 187,585.07 186,373.86 RECLAMATION DISTRICT 800 60-07-003 3,935,508.72 3,910,097.66 RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2026 60-07-005 8,156.26 8,103.60 - RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2137 60-07-006 317,726.80 315,675.28 RODEO -HERCULES FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 17-07-001 2,216,022.13 2,201,713.57 SAN RAMON VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-004 267,653.47 265,925.27 WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-014 23,482,095.84 23,330,475.02 TOTAL 243,018,219.68 241,449,082.87 1. Calculated based on LAIF Fair Vaule Factor. Information only. Page 26 December 3.929 November 3.843 October 3.670 September 3.534 August 3.434 July 3.305** PMIA Average Life(1):230 LAIF Fair Value Factor(1):0.993543131 PMIA Daily(1):3.96 PMIA Quarter to Date(1):3.81 LAIF Apportionment Rate(2):4.00 LAIF Earnings Ratio(2):0.00010932476863589 LAIF Administrative Cost(1)*:0.29 Treasuries 61.22% Agencies 21.44% Certificates of Deposit/Bank Notes 7.72% Time Deposits 3.34% Commercial Paper 5.71% Corporate Bonds 0.36% Loans 0.21% Notes: The apportionment rate includes interest earned on the CalPERS Supplemental Pension Payment pursuant to Government Code 20825 (c)(1) and interest earned on the Wildfire Fund loan pursuant to Public Utility Code 3288 (a). *The percentage of administrative cost equals the total administrative cost divided by the quarterly interest earnings. The l aw provides that administrative costs are not to exceed 5% of quarterly EARNINGS of the fund. However, if the 13-week Daily Treasury Bill Rate on the last day of the fiscal year is below 1%, then administrative costs shall not exceed 8% of quarterly EARNINGS of the fund for the subsequent fiscal year. ** Revised Source: (1) State of California, Office of the Treasurer (2) State of Calfiornia, Office of the Controller PMIA Average Monthly Effective Yields(1) PMIA/LAIF Performance Report as of 1/17/24 Daily rates are now available here. View PMIA Daily Rates Quarterly Performance Quarter Ended 12/31/23 Chart does not include $2,164,000.00 in mortgages, which equates to 0.001%.Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding. Pooled Money Investment Account Monthly Portfolio Composition (1) 12/31/23 $158.0 billion Page 27 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES ASSET MANAGEMENT FUNDS B.3. ALLSPRING B.4. CAMP B.5. CalTRUST (LIQUIDITY)* B.6. US BANK *No investments were made in the CalTRUST Liquidity Fund during the quarter. Allspring GAAP31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyInvestment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsThe information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to yourcustody statement for official portfolio holdings and transactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custodystatement.Page 28 1 - 45 - 67 - 89 - 1011 - 1516 - 21Risk Summary (Contra Costa County)Performance Summary Gross of Fees (Contra Costa County) Performance Summary Net of Fees (Contra Costa County) GAAP FX Financials (Contra Costa County)Income Detail (Contra Costa County)Balance Sheet Classification (Contra Costa County) Table of Contents`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.*Additional information will be provided upon request.Page 29 Balance SheetBook Value + Accrued44,502,931.61Net Unrealized Gain/Loss36,796.20Market Value + Accrued44,539,727.81Portfolio CharacteristicsRisk MetricValueCash28,936.99MMFund885,826.63Fixed Income43,624,964.19Duration0.550Convexity0.008WAL0.600Years to Final Maturity 0.907Years to Effective Maturity 0.587Yield5.172Book Yield5.111Avg Credit RatingAA+/Aa1/AA+Issuer ConcentrationIssuer Concentration% of BaseMarket Value+ AccruedOther58.99%United States18.46%Farm Credit System6.85%Federal Home Loan Banks6.71%International Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment2.27%Gotham Funding Corporation2.24%Old Line Funding, LLC2.24%Jupiter Securitization Company LLC2.24%---100.00%Footnotes: 1,2Asset Class (%)Security Type (%)Market Sector (%)Risk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 30 Credit RatingCredit Duration Heat MapRating 0 - 1 1 - 2 2 - 3 3 - 4 4 - 5 5 - 7 7 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 30AAA 56.68% 11.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%AA 8.64% 3.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%A 12.71% 3.91% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%BBB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%BB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%B 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%CCC 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%CC 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%C 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%NA 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%Time To MaturityDurationRisk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 31 Industry SectorIndustry GroupIndustry SubgroupMMF Asset AllocationCurrencyCountryRisk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 32 1: * Grouped by: Issuer Concentration. 2: * Groups Sorted by: % of Base Market Value + Accrued.Risk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 33 Gross of Fees (includes trading).PeriodPeriod BeginPeriod EndTotal Return, Gross ofFeesWeighted AverageIndex ReturnExcess Total Return,Gross of FeesMonth to Date12/01/202312/31/20230.62%0.52%0.10%Quarter to Date10/01/202312/31/20231.70%1.49%0.20%Year to Date01/01/202312/31/20235.25%5.14%0.11%Prior Month11/01/202311/30/20230.63%0.52%0.11%Prior Quarter07/01/202309/30/20231.28%1.32%-0.04%Prior Year01/01/202212/31/20220.69%1.34%-0.65%Trailing Month12/01/202312/31/20230.62%0.52%0.10%Trailing Quarter10/01/202312/31/20231.70%1.49%0.20%Trailing Year01/01/202312/31/20235.25%5.14%0.11%AccountIndexIndex Start DateIndex End DateContra Costa CountyML 6 Month T-Bill01/01/198011/30/2004Contra Costa CountyICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index12/01/2004---Performance Summary Gross ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 34 Returns are actual and have not been annualized. No Tax Adjustment. Note that data will not exist prior to the performance inception date of: 04/01/2001. Historical data exists for the options shown below, only available on historical data boundaries: Reported Index Return is always Total Return.Begin Date,End DateReturn Type,Fee OptionsTax Options04/01/200101/31/2011Total ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Income ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Price ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment01/01/200801/31/2011Book ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax AdjustmentPerformance Summary Gross ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 35 Net of Fees (includes management and trading).PeriodPeriod BeginPeriod EndTotal Return, Net ofFeesWeighted AverageIndex ReturnExcess Total Return,Net of FeesMonth to Date12/01/202312/31/20230.61%0.52%0.09%Quarter to Date10/01/202312/31/20231.67%1.49%0.18%Year to Date01/01/202312/31/20235.15%5.14%0.01%Prior Month11/01/202311/30/20230.62%0.52%0.10%Prior Quarter07/01/202309/30/20231.26%1.32%-0.06%Prior Year01/01/202212/31/20220.60%1.34%-0.73%Trailing Month12/01/202312/31/20230.61%0.52%0.09%Trailing Quarter10/01/202312/31/20231.67%1.49%0.18%Trailing Year01/01/202312/31/20235.15%5.14%0.01%AccountIndexIndex Start DateIndex End DateContra Costa CountyML 6 Month T-Bill01/01/198011/30/2004Contra Costa CountyICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index12/01/2004---Performance Summary Net ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 36 Returns are actual and have not been annualized. No Tax Adjustment. Note that data will not exist prior to the performance inception date of: 04/01/2001. Historical data exists for the options shown below, only available on historical data boundaries: Reported Index Return is always Total Return.Begin Date,End DateReturn Type,Fee OptionsTax Options04/01/200101/31/2011Total ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Income ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Price ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment01/01/200801/31/2011Book ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax AdjustmentPerformance Summary Net ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 37 Balance SheetContra Costa CountyAs of:09/30/202312/31/2023Book Value44,290,088.6044,264,673.38Accrued Balance182,897.41238,258.23Book Value + Accrued44,472,986.0144,502,931.61Net FX Unrealized AccruedGain/Loss0.000.00Net FX Unrealized Carrying ValueSecurity Gain/Loss0.000.00Net Market Unrealized CarryingValue Gain/Loss-156,573.7436,796.20Carrying Value and Accrued44,316,412.2644,539,727.81Income StatementContra Costa CountyBegin DateEnd Date10/01/202312/31/2023Net Amortization/Accretion Income249,423.99Interest Income304,223.82Dividend Income0.00Foreign Tax Withheld Expense0.00Misc Income0.00Net Market Allowance Expense0.00Net FX Allowance Expense0.00Income Subtotal304,223.82Net FX Realized Gain/Loss0.00Net Market Realized Gain/Loss0.00Net Total Holding Gain/Loss0.00Total Impairment Loss0.00Net Total Gain/Loss0.00Expense-10,655.72Net Income542,992.09Transfers In/Out-513,046.49Change in FX Unrealized Gain/Loss0.00Change in Market Unrealized Gain/Loss193,369.95GAAP FX FinancialsUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 38 Statement of Cash FlowsContra Costa CountyBegin DateEnd Date10/01/202312/31/2023Net Income542,992.09Amortization/Accretion on MS-218,215.65Change in Accrued on MS-19,690.58Net Gain/Loss on MS0.00Change in Unrealized G/L on CE-305.12Subtotal-238,211.35Purchase of MS-9,902,337.48Purchased Accrued of MS-32,582.74Sales of MS1,404,528.34Sold Accrued of MS0.00Maturities of MS9,246,379.28Net Purchases/Sales715,987.40Transfers of Cash & CE-513,046.49Total Change in Cash & CE507,721.65Beginning Cash & CE3,899,771.75Ending Cash & CE4,411,114.12GAAP FX FinancialsUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 39 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income94975P405ALLSPRING:GOVT MM I885,826.635.2312/31/202312/31/20230.00---19,885.690.000.000.0019,885.6903065WAB1AMCAR 2022-2 A2A105,256.964.2002/27/202412/18/20250.0006/22/20221,473.962.380.000.001,476.3402665WEQ0AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP500,000.005.8010/03/202510/03/20250.0010/04/20237,008.3356.690.000.007,065.0302582JJR2AMXCA 2021-1 A800,000.000.9011/14/202411/16/20260.0001/31/20231,800.007,082.000.000.008,882.00037833CU2APPLE INC700,000.002.8505/11/202405/11/20240.0006/02/20234,987.504,240.290.000.009,227.7904821UX64Atlantic Asset Securitization Corp.0.000.0010/06/202310/06/20230.0008/04/20230.00752.780.000.00752.7804821TAJ4Atlantic Asset Securitization Corp.1,000,000.000.0001/18/202401/18/20240.0010/23/20230.0010,791.670.000.0010,791.6706051GFB0BANK OF AMERICA CORP700,000.004.1301/22/202401/22/20240.0006/12/20237,218.752,636.380.000.009,855.1306406HCV9BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP700,000.003.4005/15/202405/15/20240.0006/01/20235,950.003,579.830.000.009,529.8309247XAL5BLACKROCK INC500,000.003.5003/18/202403/18/20240.0005/27/20224,375.00-1,112.070.000.003,262.9305593AAC3BMWLT 2023-1 A3700,000.005.1611/12/202411/25/20250.0002/27/20239,030.0062.110.000.009,092.1113077DKD3CALIFORNIA ST UNIV REV300,000.001.7711/01/202511/01/20250.0011/14/2023691.681,369.400.000.002,061.0814318XAB1CARMX 2023-4 A2A350,000.006.0812/04/202412/15/20260.0010/18/20234,315.112.440.000.004,317.55CCYUSDCash-2.240.0012/31/202312/31/2023-513,046.49---0.000.000.00-10,655.72-10,655.7214912L5X5CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP0.003.7511/24/202311/24/20230.0012/02/20223,864.581,141.410.000.005,006.0014913UAB6CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP500,000.005.1508/11/202508/11/20250.0012/01/20232,145.83-43.820.000.002,102.0117325FAS7CITIBANK NA600,000.003.6501/23/202401/23/20240.0008/25/20225,475.00-158.130.000.005,316.87254683BZ7DCENT 2017-4 A750,000.002.5304/14/202404/15/20240.0010/26/20233,426.044,713.220.000.008,139.2630231GAC6EXXON MOBIL CORP579,000.003.1803/15/202403/15/20240.0004/17/20234,597.262,341.870.000.006,939.133133ENJ84FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.003.3808/26/202408/26/20240.0011/04/20224,218.751,801.720.000.006,020.473133ENL40FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.003.5009/13/202409/13/20240.0007/26/20234,375.002,304.450.000.006,679.453133EPPC3FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.005.3807/03/202407/03/20240.0007/03/202313,437.500.000.000.0013,437.50Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 40 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income3133EPYK5FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.005.1310/10/202510/10/20250.0010/10/202311,531.25-14.930.000.0011,516.323130A0XE5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.003.2503/08/202403/08/20240.0009/29/20228,125.002,646.310.000.0010,771.313130AQF57FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS0.000.6312/22/202312/22/20230.0012/22/2021703.13124.120.000.00827.25313384MU0FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS0.000.0010/10/202310/10/20230.0005/23/20230.001,285.000.000.001,285.00313384NC9FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS0.000.0010/18/202310/18/20230.0004/17/20230.002,295.000.000.002,295.00313384TY5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.000.0003/06/202403/06/20240.0003/06/20230.0012,956.670.000.0012,956.67313384TW9FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.000.0003/04/202403/04/20240.0008/14/20230.0013,352.780.000.0013,352.7834528LAD7FORDL 2022-A A3279,315.313.2303/16/202405/15/20250.0011/30/20223,034.112,754.620.000.005,788.73380130AB0GMALT 2022-3 A2A0.004.0112/20/202310/21/20240.0008/17/2022272.570.720.000.00273.30380130AB0GMALT 2022-3 A2A0.004.0112/20/202310/21/20240.0008/17/2022378.980.740.000.00379.72362541AB0GMALT 2023-1 A2A235,680.175.2704/20/202406/20/20250.0002/16/20233,761.069.330.000.003,770.3838346MXP4Gotham Funding Corporation0.000.0010/23/202310/23/20230.0007/21/20230.003,348.890.000.003,348.8938346LA55Gotham Funding Corporation1,000,000.000.0001/05/202401/05/20240.0011/08/20230.008,175.000.000.008,175.0043815JAB9HAROT 2023-1 A2394,100.995.2206/01/202410/21/20250.0002/24/20235,943.907.540.000.005,951.4443815QAB3HAROT 2023-3 A2400,000.005.7109/18/202403/18/20260.0011/30/20231,966.78-22.430.000.001,944.3544933DAB7HART 2022-C A2A264,042.285.3504/18/202411/17/20250.0011/09/20224,158.235.340.000.004,163.58448979AB0HART 2023-A A2A202,057.595.1905/17/202412/15/20250.0004/12/20232,965.103.750.000.002,968.85438516CH7HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC0.004.8511/01/202411/01/20240.0011/02/20223,132.295.590.000.003,137.88438516CH7HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC750,000.004.8511/01/202411/01/20240.0011/02/20225,961.4610.480.000.005,971.944581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK1,000,000.000.5009/23/202409/23/20240.0010/12/20231,097.2210,558.010.000.0011,655.23459058HC0INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM1,000,000.005.6408/06/202408/06/20240.0008/11/202314,446.94-539.040.000.0013,907.90Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 41 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income459058JM6INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM0.000.2511/24/202311/24/20230.0007/11/2023489.519,901.650.000.0010,391.17459058JM6INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM0.000.2511/24/202311/24/20230.0008/11/2023117.782,427.430.000.002,545.2147787NAC3JDOT 2020-B A30.000.5111/15/202311/15/20240.0009/09/20215.66-3.020.000.002.6447787JAC2JDOT 2022 A3422,520.820.3609/29/202409/15/20260.0004/21/20232,701.984,018.380.000.006,720.3624422EVN6JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP500,000.000.4501/17/202401/17/20240.0001/05/2023562.505,293.050.000.005,855.5546625HKC3JPMORGAN CHASE & CO700,000.003.1301/23/202501/23/20250.0002/02/20235,468.752,309.830.000.007,778.584820P3Y64Jupiter Securitization Company LLC0.000.0011/06/202311/06/20230.0008/10/20230.006,850.000.000.006,850.004820P3Z14Jupiter Securitization Company LLC0.000.0012/01/202312/01/20230.0011/06/20230.003,743.060.000.003,743.064820P2AH8Jupiter Securitization Company LLC1,000,000.000.0001/17/202401/17/20240.0012/29/20230.00444.170.000.00444.1758769KAE4MBALT 2021-B A4285,000.000.5102/12/202403/15/20270.0006/01/2023363.392,810.220.000.003,173.6158768PAC8MBART 2022-1 A3400,000.005.2104/08/202508/16/20270.0006/26/20235,210.0176.940.000.005,286.9558770AAB9MBART 2023-1 A260,021.245.0904/29/202401/15/20260.0001/25/20234,028.732.320.000.004,031.0558770AAB9MBART 2023-1 A20.005.0904/10/202401/15/20260.0001/25/2023-3,121.18-2.240.000.00-3,123.4261761JVL0MORGAN STANLEY0.003.7010/23/202410/23/20240.0004/17/20231,654.72476.040.000.002,130.7661761JVL0MORGAN STANLEY700,000.003.7010/23/202410/23/20240.0004/17/20234,820.281,428.110.000.006,248.3965480DAC7NALT 2021-A A30.000.5211/15/202308/15/20240.0003/04/202212.0817.090.000.0029.1765480DAC7NALT 2021-A A30.000.5211/15/202308/15/20240.0005/19/202210.2027.860.000.0038.0665480JAB6NAROT 2022-B A294,444.864.5004/03/202408/16/20250.0006/01/20231,270.59367.690.000.001,638.2765480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A3400,000.004.4604/08/202505/17/20270.0007/27/20234,460.01538.450.000.004,998.4665480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A375,000.004.4604/08/202505/17/20270.0009/21/2023836.25112.150.000.00948.40637432MV4NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVEFINANCE CORP0.003.4011/15/202311/15/20230.0003/10/20232,908.891,694.700.000.004,603.59Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 42 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income63743HFF4NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVEFINANCE CORP700,000.005.4510/30/202510/30/20250.0012/01/20233,179.17-157.710.000.003,021.46672325S81OAKLAND CALIF UNI SCH DIST ALAMEDA CNTY500,000.005.7002/01/202402/01/20240.0011/22/20233,087.500.000.000.003,087.5067983TAB2Old Line Funding, LLC1,000,000.000.0001/11/202401/11/20240.0009/11/20230.0014,004.440.000.0014,004.4469371RR40PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP750,000.000.5008/09/202408/09/20240.0008/30/2023937.509,282.000.000.0010,219.50713448FU7PEPSICO INC0.005.7511/12/202411/12/20240.0011/10/202379.440.000.000.0079.44713448FU7PEPSICO INC500,000.005.7511/12/202411/12/20240.0011/10/20233,911.740.000.000.003,911.74CCYUSDReceivable28,939.230.0012/31/202312/31/20230.00---0.000.000.000.000.00769036BD5RIVERSIDE CALIF PENSION OBLIG750,000.002.7506/01/202406/01/20240.0011/29/20231,833.332,005.420.000.003,838.75828807DG9SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP500,000.002.0009/13/202409/13/20240.0011/01/20231,666.673,205.870.000.004,872.54857477BC6STATE STREET CORP0.003.7812/03/202312/03/20240.0005/24/20234,552.184,243.950.000.008,796.1389239KAC5TAOT 2022-A A3411,680.211.2307/18/202406/15/20260.0006/21/20221,392.603,437.590.000.004,830.19891941AB2TAOT 2023-B A2A221,994.135.2806/30/202404/15/20260.0005/23/20233,071.480.880.000.003,072.3688602UY79Thunder Bay Funding, LLC0.000.0011/07/202311/07/20230.0006/26/20230.005,580.830.000.005,580.8389236TJN6TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP700,000.000.6309/13/202409/13/20240.0010/31/20221,093.757,031.200.000.008,124.9586787EBC0TRUIST BANK600,000.003.2004/01/202404/01/20240.0005/19/20224,800.00-50.290.000.004,749.719128282U3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.001.8808/31/202408/31/20240.0010/24/20233,554.266,565.500.000.0010,119.7791282CCC3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,500,000.000.2505/15/202405/15/20240.0005/17/2023942.7616,838.300.000.0017,781.0691282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.000.8801/31/202401/31/20240.0001/31/20222,187.50388.910.000.002,576.4191282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.000.8801/31/202401/31/20240.0005/22/20232,187.5010,498.280.000.0012,685.7891282CEG2UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.002.2503/31/202403/31/20240.0008/30/20225,655.742,867.550.000.008,523.2991282CFA4UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.003.0007/31/202407/31/20240.0008/10/20223,750.00328.970.000.004,078.97Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 43 * Weighted by: Ending Base Market Value + Accrued. * Holdings Displayed by: Lot.Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income912797FB8UNITED STATES TREASURY0.000.0010/19/202310/19/20230.0006/26/20230.002,591.250.000.002,591.2591282CHD6UNITED STATES TREASURY750,000.004.2505/31/202505/31/20250.0009/18/20238,012.301,610.240.000.009,622.5491282CHL8UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.004.6306/30/202506/30/20250.0008/28/202311,563.881,117.700.000.0012,681.5891282CJE2UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.005.0010/31/202510/31/20250.0012/01/20232,129.12-98.600.000.002,030.5291324PEM0UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC0.005.0010/15/202410/15/20240.0010/28/20221,458.336.430.000.001,464.7791324PEM0UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC700,000.005.0010/15/202410/15/20240.0010/28/20227,291.6733.030.000.007,324.7092512MX46Versailles Commercial Paper LLC0.000.0010/04/202310/04/20230.0009/01/20230.00451.670.000.00451.6792512LD32Versailles Commercial Paper LLC1,000,000.000.0004/03/202404/03/20240.0012/07/20230.003,805.560.000.003,805.5692868AAB1VWALT 2022-A A20.003.0201/20/202410/21/20240.0006/14/2022315.750.980.000.00316.7392868AAB1VWALT 2022-A A25,106.133.0201/20/202410/21/20240.0006/14/2022485.781.080.000.00486.8692868AAC9VWALT 2022-A A3350,000.003.4404/18/202407/21/20250.0002/27/20233,009.991,520.560.000.004,530.5592348KAH6VZMT 2022-2 A800,000.001.5301/20/202507/20/20280.0009/11/20233,060.007,965.540.000.0011,025.5494988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.005.5507/01/202508/01/20250.0008/09/20234,162.5027.490.000.004,189.9994988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.005.5507/01/202508/01/20250.0010/18/20233,376.25111.640.000.003,487.8998163WAC0WOART 2020-B A319,337.710.6301/14/202405/15/20250.0010/14/202287.32441.870.000.00529.2098163NAC0WOLS 2022-A A3416,917.663.2104/07/202402/18/20250.0002/28/20233,833.662,703.850.000.006,537.51------44,636,239.692.8108/02/202411/27/2024-513,046.49---304,223.82249,423.990.00-10,655.72542,992.09Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 44 CESTIdentifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued94975P405ALLSPRING:GOVT MM I885,826.631.000012/31/20235.2312/31/2023 AAACash5.225.22885,826.63885,826.630.00885,826.630.00885,826.63CCYUSDReceivable28,939.231.000012/31/20230.0012/31/2023 AAACash0.000.0028,939.2328,939.230.0028,939.230.0028,939.23CCYUSDCash-2.241.000012/31/20230.0012/31/2023 AAACash0.000.00-2.24-2.240.00-2.240.00-2.2438346LA55Gotham Funding Corporation1,000,000.0099.896101/05/20240.0001/05/2024 A-1+Financial5.535.34991,219.44999,394.44-433.44998,961.000.00998,961.0004821TAJ4Atlantic Asset Securitization Corp.1,000,000.0099.702401/18/20240.0001/18/2024 A-1+Financial5.675.37986,587.50997,379.17-355.17997,024.000.00997,024.00672325S81OAKLAND CALIF UNI SCH DIST ALAMEDA CNTY500,000.00100.021002/01/20245.7002/01/2024 A+Municipal5.705.43500,000.00500,000.00105.00500,105.003,087.50503,192.504820P2AH8Jupiter Securitization Company LLC1,000,000.0099.717301/17/20240.0001/17/2024 A-1+Financial5.415.37997,186.94997,631.11-458.11997,173.000.00997,173.00------4,414,763.6279.317401/13/20241.7001/13/2024 AAA---5.455.314,389,757.504,409,168.34-1,141.724,408,026.623,087.504,411,114.12Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued06051GFB0BANK OF AMERICA CORP700,000.0099.918001/22/20244.1301/22/2024 AA-Financial5.665.31693,581.00699,398.2228.08699,426.2912,753.13712,179.4209247XAL5BLACKROCK INC500,000.0099.565303/18/20243.5003/18/2024 AA-Financial2.595.45507,990.00500,930.76-3,104.13497,826.635,006.94502,833.5730231GAC6EXXON MOBIL CORP579,000.0099.509703/15/20243.1803/15/2024 AAIndustrial4.835.47570,523.44577,116.32-954.94576,161.385,414.55581,575.9306406HCV9BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP700,000.0099.160005/15/20243.4005/15/2024 AA-Financial5.515.65686,420.00694,746.99-626.99694,120.003,041.11697,161.11Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 45 Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued3130A0XE5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.0099.600603/08/20243.2503/08/2024 AAAAgency4.345.31984,870.00998,072.79-2,066.32996,006.4710,201.391,006,207.8661761JVL0MORGAN STANLEY700,000.0098.701510/23/20243.7010/23/2024 A+Financial4.835.33688,513.00693,873.60-2,962.80690,910.804,892.22695,803.02254683BZ7DCENT 2017-4 A750,000.0099.137404/15/20242.5304/14/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.055.55737,900.39742,613.61916.74743,530.35843.33744,373.68037833CU2APPLE INC700,000.0099.065605/11/20242.8505/11/2024 AAAIndustrial5.355.35684,145.00693,962.19-503.15693,459.052,770.83696,229.889128282U3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0097.953108/31/20241.8808/31/2024 AAAGovernment5.495.01970,312.50976,878.002,653.25979,531.256,335.85985,867.1017325FAS7CITIBANK NA600,000.0099.888101/23/20243.6501/23/2024 AA-Financial3.655.25600,924.00600,000.00-671.20599,328.809,611.67608,940.4686787EBC0TRUIST BANK600,000.0099.340004/01/20243.2004/01/2024 A+Financial3.175.77600,356.40600,032.80-3,992.53596,040.264,800.00600,840.26828807DG9SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP500,000.0097.719109/13/20242.0009/13/2024 A-Financial6.005.32483,340.00486,545.872,049.42488,595.283,000.00491,595.28459058HC0INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM1,000,000.00100.159708/06/20245.6408/06/2024 AAAGovernment5.495.141,002,115.131,001,277.28319.371,001,596.658,780.641,010,377.2924422EVN6JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP500,000.0099.793101/17/20240.4501/17/2024 A+Industrial4.804.59478,310.00499,079.47-114.12498,965.341,025.00499,990.3491282CCC3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,500,000.0098.203105/15/20240.2505/15/2024 AAAGovernment4.885.081,433,378.911,475,291.63-2,244.751,473,046.88484.201,473,531.0869371RR40PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP750,000.0097.061008/09/20240.5008/09/2024 A+Industrial5.635.45715,192.50727,703.02254.64727,957.661,479.17729,436.8289236TJN6TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP700,000.0096.842609/13/20240.6309/13/2024 A+Industrial4.855.24647,801.00680,434.93-2,536.69677,898.231,312.50679,210.734581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK1,000,000.0096.780909/23/20240.5009/23/2024 AAAGovernment5.465.02954,770.00965,328.012,480.64967,808.651,361.11969,169.7691282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0099.645701/31/20240.8801/31/2024 AAAGovernment1.034.83996,914.06999,873.18-3,416.11996,457.073,661.681,000,118.75Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 46 Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued91282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0099.645701/31/20240.8801/31/2024 AAAGovernment5.184.83971,015.63996,576.65-119.58996,457.073,661.681,000,118.7591282CEG2UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0099.253903/31/20242.2503/31/2024 AAAGovernment3.435.14981,953.13997,194.79-4,655.73992,539.065,717.21998,256.2792868AAB1VWALT 2022-A A25,106.1399.944810/21/20243.0201/20/2024 AAAAsset Backed3.044.005,105.735,106.12-2.805,103.314.715,108.0291282CFA4UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.0098.820307/31/20243.0007/31/2024 AAAGovernment3.275.05497,421.88499,241.94-5,140.38494,101.566,277.17500,378.733133ENJ84FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.0099.027708/26/20243.3808/26/2024 AAAAgency4.884.89487,055.00495,339.02-200.59495,138.425,859.38500,997.803133ENL40FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.0099.035109/13/20243.5009/13/2024 AAAAgency5.424.90489,604.91493,587.611,588.07495,175.685,250.00500,425.6891324PEM0UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC700,000.0099.871510/15/20245.0010/15/2024 A+Industrial5.025.15699,692.00699,876.46-776.21699,100.257,388.89706,489.14438516CH7HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC750,000.0099.646011/01/20244.8511/01/2024 AIndustrial4.865.27749,872.50749,946.73-2,602.04747,344.696,062.50753,407.19769036BD5RIVERSIDE CALIF PENSION OBLIG750,000.0098.949006/01/20242.7506/01/2024 AAMunicipal5.805.28738,757.50740,762.921,354.58742,117.501,718.75743,836.25313384TY5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.0099.024403/06/20240.0003/06/2024 A-1+Agency5.275.22948,455.00990,845.83-601.94990,243.890.00990,243.89313384TW9FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.0099.053103/04/20240.0003/04/2024 A-1+Agency5.375.30970,536.81990,856.25-325.42990,530.830.00990,530.833133EPPC3FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.00100.127507/03/20245.3807/03/2024 AAAAgency5.375.121,000,000.001,000,000.001,275.191,001,275.1926,576.391,027,851.5867983TAB2Old Line Funding, LLC1,000,000.0099.807201/11/20240.0001/11/2024 A-1+Financial5.565.35981,428.89998,477.78-405.78998,072.000.00998,072.0092512LD32Versailles Commercial Paper LLC1,000,000.0098.538804/03/20240.0004/03/2024 A-1+Financial5.615.56982,037.78985,843.34-455.34985,388.000.00985,388.00713448FU7PEPSICO INC500,000.00100.154811/12/20245.7511/12/2024 A+Industrial5.845.04500,000.00500,000.00773.83500,773.833,991.19504,765.02Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 47 LTIdentifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued------25,984,106.1399.041105/23/20242.3105/23/2024 AA+---4.885.2125,440,294.0925,756,814.10-24,785.7725,732,028.33159,283.2125,891,311.54Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued46625HKC3JPMORGAN CHASE & CO700,000.0097.910201/23/20253.1301/23/2025 AA-Financial4.515.17681,898.00690,258.56-4,887.07685,371.509,600.69694,972.1998163WAC0WOART 2020-B A319,337.7199.784005/15/20250.6301/14/2024 AAAAsset Backed2.285.5718,935.8419,325.42-29.4819,295.955.4119,301.3658769KAE4MBALT 2021-B A4285,000.0099.380203/15/20270.5102/12/2024 AAAAsset Backed9.225.80273,633.40281,258.641,974.81283,233.4664.60283,298.0613077DKD3CALIFORNIA ST UNIV REV300,000.0094.944011/01/20251.7711/01/2025 AAMunicipal5.484.66279,516.00280,885.403,946.60284,832.00883.00285,715.0002582JJR2AMXCA 2021-1 A800,000.0096.396711/16/20260.9011/14/2024 AAAAsset Backed4.545.27749,656.25775,443.95-4,270.19771,173.76320.00771,493.7692348KAH6VZMT 2022-2 A800,000.0096.325307/20/20281.5301/20/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.684.25756,968.75766,665.933,936.79770,602.72374.00770,976.7289239KAC5TAOT 2022-A A3411,680.2197.301306/15/20261.2307/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed4.626.35393,460.14402,553.91-1,983.71400,570.19225.05400,795.2547787JAC2JDOT 2022 A3422,520.8297.766409/15/20260.3609/29/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.975.46406,560.76411,042.932,040.55413,083.48435.67413,519.1598163NAC0WOLS 2022-A A3416,917.6699.377202/18/20253.2104/07/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.775.64407,813.87413,370.26950.88414,321.14594.80414,915.9434528LAD7FORDL 2022-A A3279,315.3199.548805/15/20253.2303/16/2024 AAAAsset Backed7.075.49272,637.93277,620.86434.20278,055.07400.97278,456.0492868AAC9VWALT 2022-A A3350,000.0099.227107/21/20253.4404/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.646.11342,083.98346,599.04695.91347,294.96367.89347,662.8403065WAB1AMCAR 2022-2 A2A105,256.9699.663712/18/20254.2002/27/2024 AAAAsset Backed4.246.38105,248.99105,255.38-352.38104,903.00159.64105,062.64Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 48 Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued65480JAB6NAROT 2022-B A294,444.8699.680008/16/20254.5004/03/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.865.8193,714.3994,068.8673.7794,142.63188.8994,331.5265480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A3400,000.0099.263405/17/20274.4604/08/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.515.12393,156.25394,099.802,953.84397,053.64792.89397,846.5365480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A375,000.0099.263405/17/20274.4604/08/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.615.1273,666.9973,791.73655.8374,447.56148.6774,596.2263743HFF4NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVEFINANCE CORP700,000.00101.005310/30/20255.4510/30/2025 AFinancial5.174.87703,556.00703,398.293,638.68707,036.976,464.31713,501.2844933DAB7HART 2022-C A2A264,042.2899.926011/17/20255.3504/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.425.67264,025.94264,036.05-189.15263,846.89627.83264,474.7358768PAC8MBART 2022-1 A3400,000.00100.142108/16/20275.2104/08/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.415.15399,015.63399,173.701,394.70400,568.40926.22401,494.6258770AAB9MBART 2023-1 A260,021.2499.833501/15/20265.0904/29/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.155.6760,019.1760,020.29-98.9959,921.30135.7860,057.0805593AAC3BMWLT 2023-1 A3700,000.0099.873711/25/20255.1611/12/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.275.37699,507.81699,715.76-600.00699,115.76602.00699,717.76362541AB0GMALT 2023-1 A2A235,680.1799.922006/20/20255.2704/20/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.345.56235,660.92235,675.24-178.89235,496.34379.51235,875.8543815JAB9HAROT 2023-1 A2394,100.9999.834010/21/20255.2206/01/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.285.69394,077.30394,088.36-641.46393,446.90571.45394,018.35448979AB0HART 2023-A A2A202,057.5999.859112/15/20255.1905/17/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.255.63202,045.91202,050.94-278.01201,772.93466.08202,239.0114913UAB6CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP500,000.00100.726108/11/20255.1508/11/2025 A+Industrial5.044.69500,875.00500,831.182,799.43503,630.6010,013.89513,644.49891941AB2TAOT 2023-B A2A221,994.1399.850904/15/20265.2806/30/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.345.65221,989.00221,990.65-327.60221,663.05520.95222,184.0091282CHD6UNITED STATES TREASURY750,000.0099.644505/31/20254.2505/31/2025 AAAGovernment5.154.50739,130.86740,968.646,365.35747,333.982,786.89750,120.8791282CHL8UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.00100.253906/30/20254.6306/30/2025 AAAGovernment5.094.46991,835.94993,366.709,172.361,002,539.06127.061,002,666.12Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 49 Summary* Grouped by: BS Class 2. * Groups Sorted by: BS Class 2. * Weighted by: Base Market Value + Accrued, except Book Yield by Base Book Value + Accrued. * Holdings Displayed by: Lot.Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued94988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.00101.018608/01/20255.5507/01/2025 AAFinancial5.594.84299,784.00299,827.323,228.34303,055.666,567.50309,623.1694988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.00101.018608/01/20255.5507/01/2025 AAFinancial5.744.84299,028.00299,139.643,916.02303,055.666,567.50309,623.1643815QAB3HAROT 2023-3 A2400,000.00100.295203/18/20265.7109/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.665.35400,375.00400,352.57828.15401,180.72824.78402,005.5002665WEQ0AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP500,000.00101.739110/03/20255.8010/03/2025 A-Industrial5.854.77499,535.00499,591.699,103.81508,695.517,008.33515,703.843133EPYK5FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.00101.212910/10/20255.1310/10/2025 AAAAgency5.124.411,000,131.481,000,116.5512,012.091,012,128.6411,531.251,023,659.8914318XAB1CARMX 2023-4 A2A350,000.00100.784112/15/20266.0812/04/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.165.27349,976.27349,978.712,765.71352,744.42945.78353,690.2091282CJE2UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.00101.160210/31/20255.0010/31/2025 AAAGovernment4.754.34502,226.56502,127.963,672.82505,800.784,258.24510,059.02------14,237,369.9499.499002/08/20264.0502/08/2025 AA+---5.435.0614,011,747.3514,098,690.9462,723.6914,161,414.6375,887.5214,237,302.15Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued------44,636,239.6997.234111/27/20242.8108/02/2024 AA+---5.115.1743,841,798.9444,264,673.3836,796.2044,301,469.58238,258.2344,539,727.81Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 50 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 351,373,478.26 96,522,968.68 (111,373,478.26) 0.00 $336,522,968.68 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 1,522,968.68 Cash Dividends and Income October 31, 2023 September 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 336,522,968.68 351,373,478.26 $336,522,968.68 $351,373,478.26 Total Asset Allocation 100.00% CAMP Pool Account 4017-001 Page 1 Page 51 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDateTransaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 351,373,478.26 Opening Balance 10/02/23 10/02/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (60,000,000.00) 291,373,478.26 10/04/23 10/04/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (1,373,478.26) 290,000,000.00 10/06/23 10/06/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (10,000,000.00) 280,000,000.00 10/13/23 10/13/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 30,000,000.00 310,000,000.00 10/16/23 10/16/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 20,000,000.00 330,000,000.00 10/19/23 10/19/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 20,000,000.00 350,000,000.00 10/20/23 10/20/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 25,000,000.00 375,000,000.00 10/26/23 10/26/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (40,000,000.00) 335,000,000.00 10/31/23 11/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 1,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 322,762,690.43 12,849,546.27 0.00 (1,085,239,072.13) 1,101,940,576.67 319,821,464.14 1,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 0.00 (111,373,478.26) 96,522,968.68 351,373,478.26 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance October January-October 5.56% Account 4017-001 Page 2 Page 52 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 25,193,841.99 118,903.78 0.00 0.00 $25,312,745.77 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 118,903.78 Cash Dividends and Income Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 10,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $10,000,000.00 CAMP TERM Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Cash Dividends and Income October 31, 2023 September 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 25,312,745.77 25,193,841.99 CAMP TERM 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 $35,312,745.77 $35,193,841.99 Total Asset Allocation 71.68% CAMP Pool 28.32% CAMP TERM Account 6164-001 Page 1 Page 53 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Investment Holdings Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 CAMP TERM Date Security Description Date Rate Amount Maturity Est. Value atSettlementMaturityInvestment Date Trade Estimated Earnings 10,264,579.24 78,450.82 10,000,000.00 5.6300 03/01/24TERM - California Asset Management Program Term Dec 2409/11/2309/08/23 $10,000,000.00 $78,450.82 $10,264,579.24 Total Account 6164-001 Page 2 Page 54 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 25,193,841.99 Opening Balance 10/31/23 11/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 118,903.78 25,312,745.77 25,312,745.77 25,312,745.77 25,312,745.77 25,197,677.60 310,151.52 0.00 (10,000,000.00) 34,310,151.52 1,002,594.25 118,903.78 25,312,745.77 0.00 0.00 118,903.78 25,193,841.99 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance October July-October 5.56% Account 6164-001 Page 3 Page 55 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 336,522,968.68 41,484,246.94 (26,522,968.68) 0.00 $351,484,246.94 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 1,484,246.94 Cash Dividends and Income November 30, 2023 October 31, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 351,484,246.94 336,522,968.68 $351,484,246.94 $336,522,968.68 Total Asset Allocation 100.00% CAMP Pool Account 4017-001 Page 1 Page 56 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 336,522,968.68 Opening Balance 11/06/23 11/06/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (1,522,968.68) 335,000,000.00 11/07/23 11/07/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (25,000,000.00) 310,000,000.00 11/09/23 11/09/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 10,000,000.00 320,000,000.00 11/30/23 11/30/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 30,000,000.00 350,000,000.00 11/30/23 12/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 1,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 323,636,636.34 14,333,793.21 0.00 (1,111,762,040.81) 1,143,424,823.61 319,821,464.14 1,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 0.00 (26,522,968.68) 41,484,246.94 336,522,968.68 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance November January-November 5.58% Account 4017-001 Page 2 Page 57 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 25,312,745.77 116,103.08 0.00 0.00 $25,428,848.85 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 116,103.08 Cash Dividends and Income Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 10,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $10,000,000.00 CAMP TERM Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Cash Dividends and Income November 30, 2023 October 31, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 25,428,848.85 25,312,745.77 CAMP TERM 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 $35,428,848.85 $35,312,745.77 Total Asset Allocation 71.77% CAMP Pool 28.23% CAMP TERM Account 6164-001 Page 1 Page 58 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Investment Holdings Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 CAMP TERM Date Security Description Date Rate Amount Maturity Est. Value atSettlementMaturityInvestment Date Trade Estimated Earnings 10,264,579.24 124,598.36 10,000,000.00 5.6300 03/01/24TERM - California Asset Management Program Term Dec 2409/11/2309/08/23 $10,000,000.00 $124,598.36 $10,264,579.24 Total Account 6164-001 Page 2 Page 59 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 25,312,745.77 Opening Balance 11/30/23 12/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 116,103.08 25,428,848.85 25,428,848.85 25,428,848.85 25,428,848.85 25,316,615.87 426,254.60 0.00 (10,000,000.00) 34,426,254.60 1,002,594.25 116,103.08 25,428,848.85 0.00 0.00 116,103.08 25,312,745.77 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance November July-November 5.58% Account 6164-001 Page 3 Page 60 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 351,484,246.94 372,025,670.66 (271,484,246.94) 0.00 $452,025,670.66 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 2,025,670.66 Cash Dividends and Income December 31, 2023 November 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 452,025,670.66 351,484,246.94 $452,025,670.66 $351,484,246.94 Total Asset Allocation 100.00% CAMP Pool Account 4017-001 Page 1 Page 61 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 351,484,246.94 Opening Balance 12/07/23 12/07/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (1,484,246.94) 350,000,000.00 12/08/23 12/08/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 80,000,000.00 430,000,000.00 12/08/23 12/08/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 70,000,000.00 500,000,000.00 12/15/23 12/15/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 95,000,000.00 595,000,000.00 12/18/23 12/18/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (90,000,000.00) 505,000,000.00 12/18/23 12/18/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (60,000,000.00) 445,000,000.00 12/19/23 12/19/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (20,000,000.00) 425,000,000.00 12/20/23 12/20/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (20,000,000.00) 405,000,000.00 12/22/23 12/22/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (80,000,000.00) 325,000,000.00 12/26/23 12/26/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 20,000,000.00 345,000,000.00 12/27/23 12/27/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 70,000,000.00 415,000,000.00 12/27/23 12/27/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 35,000,000.00 450,000,000.00 12/29/23 01/02/24 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 2,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 Account 4017-001 Page 2 Page 62 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate 452,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 429,838,144.96 16,359,463.87 0.00 (1,383,246,287.75) 1,515,450,494.27 319,821,464.14 2,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 0.00 (271,484,246.94) 372,025,670.66 351,484,246.94 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance December January-December 5.55% Account 4017-001 Page 3 Page 63 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 25,428,848.85 119,909.84 0.00 0.00 $25,548,758.69 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 119,909.84 Cash Dividends and Income Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 10,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $10,000,000.00 CAMP TERM Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Cash Dividends and Income December 31, 2023 November 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 25,548,758.69 25,428,848.85 CAMP TERM 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 $35,548,758.69 $35,428,848.85 Total Asset Allocation 71.87% CAMP Pool 28.13% CAMP TERM Account 6164-001 Page 1 Page 64 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Investment Holdings Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 CAMP TERM Date Security Description Date Rate Amount Maturity Est. Value atSettlementMaturityInvestment Date Trade Estimated Earnings 10,264,579.24 172,284.16 10,000,000.00 5.6300 03/01/24TERM - California Asset Management Program Term Dec 2409/11/2309/08/23 $10,000,000.00 $172,284.16 $10,264,579.24 Total Account 6164-001 Page 2 Page 65 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 25,428,848.85 Opening Balance 12/29/23 01/02/24 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 119,909.84 25,548,758.69 25,548,758.69 25,548,758.69 25,548,758.69 25,440,453.03 546,164.44 0.00 (10,000,000.00) 34,546,164.44 1,002,594.25 119,909.84 25,548,758.69 0.00 0.00 119,909.84 25,428,848.85 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance December July-December 5.55% Account 6164-001 Page 3 Page 66 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Ending Balance Last Accounting Period 30-Sep-23 $- Receipts For This Period Cash Dividends 114,279.56 Interest On Bonds - From Other Sources -114,279.56 - Disbursements For This Period Purchases - For Other Purposes -- Ending Balance This Accounting Period 31-Dec-23 $- Summary of Income Cash Ending Balance Last Accounting Period 30-Sep-23 $- Receipts For This Period Sales and Maturities 1,300,000.00 From Other Sources 214,279.56 1,514,279.56 Disbursements For This Period Purchases -214,279.56 For Other Purposes -1,300,000.00 -1,514,279.56 Ending Balance This Accounting Period 31-Dec-23 $- Ending Balance Last Accounting Period 30-Sep-23 $12,990,311.65 Assets Purchased or Otherwise Acquired 214,279.56 Assets Sold or Otherwise Disposed of -1,300,000.00 Ending Balance This Accounting Period 31-Dec-23 $11,904,591.21 Market Value of Account $11,904,591.21 Summary of Principal Cash Summary of Investments BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 1 of 4 Page 67 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Schedule of Transactions - By Entry Date Transactions Income Cash Principal Cash Principal Investments Invested Income Ending Balance Last Statement Period 30-Sep-23 $--12,990,311.65 - 02-Oct-23 Cash Dividend on FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 Due on 02-Oct-2023 38,086.30 --- 03-Oct-23 Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer To Primary (Capital) -38,086.30 -- Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer From Primary (Income) -38,086.30 --- Purchase 38086.3 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --38,086.30 38,086.30 - 27-Oct-23 Cash Receipt - Miscellaneous Receipt via Wire -100,000.00 -- 30-Oct-23 Purchase 100000 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --100,000.00 100,000.00 - 01-Nov-23 Daily Rate Income on FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 For Period of 01-Oct-2023 to 31-Oct-2023 Due on 01-Nov-2023 39,840.61 --- 02-Nov-23 Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer From Primary (Income) -39,840.61 --- Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer To Primary (Capital) -39,840.61 -- Purchase 39840.61 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --39,840.61 39,840.61 - BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 2 of 4 Page 68 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Schedule of Transactions - By Entry Date Transactions Income Cash Principal Cash Principal Investments Invested Income 01-Dec-23 Cash Disbursement Via Wire, Paid To WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTH CARE DIST --1,300,000.00 -- Daily Rate Income on FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 For Period of 01-Nov-2023 to 30-Nov-2023 Due on 01-Dec-2023 36,352.65 --- Sale 1300000 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD -1,300,000.00 -1,300,000.00 - 04-Dec-23 Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer From Primary (Income) -36,352.65 --- Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer To Primary (Capital) -36,352.65 -- Purchase 36352.65 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --36,352.65 36,352.65 - Ending Balance This Statement Period 31-Dec-23 $--11,904,591.21 - BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 3 of 4 Page 69 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Schedule of Assets as of December 31, 2023 Cusip Asset Name Shares Book Value Market Value Est Income Yield CASH Principal Cash ---- Income Cash ---- CASH Total ---- Open-end Money Market fund 60934N666 FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 461,101.36 3.87 Open-end Money Market fund Total 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 461,101.36 3.87 229842000 Total 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 461,101.36 3.87 BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 4 of 4 Page 70 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES B. 7. EAST BAY REGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AUTHORITY (EBRCS) EBRCS TRANSACTIONS* as of December 31, 2023 FY 2023-2024 FUND BALANCE @ TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date BALANCE @ NUMBER 09/30/23 12/31/23 100300 863,700.20 863,700.20 TOTALS 863,700.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 863,700.20 * East Bay Regional Communications System Authority Page 71 EXHIBITS Note: All exhibits are prepared for information only. The exhibits are unaudited but due diligence was utilized in its preparation. The information in the exhibits may be updated and is subject to change without notice. Changes will be reflected in the next reports. Exhibit I CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL PERFORMANCE SUMMARY 12/31/2023 AVERAGE DAYS TO 3 PERCENT OF MATURITY AT PAR PORTFOLIO YTM END-OF-QUARTER DURATION ($)(%)(%)(day)(year) A. Investments Managed by Treasurer's Office1 $5,943,641,404.12 86.48%4.7290%288 0.73 2 B. Investments Managed by Outside Contractors3 1. PFM $77,246,529.93 1.12%3.8190%755 1.71 2 2. Local Agency Investment Fund $243,018,219.68 3.54%3.8100%1 0.00 3. Allspring Global Investments $44,636,239.69 0.65%5.1720%331 0.55 4 4. CAMP $487,574,429.35 7.09%5.5500%5 0 0.00 5. CalTRUST Liquidity Fund $0.00 0.00%N/A 0 0.00 6. US Bank (Federated Tax Free Cash Fund)$11,904,591.21 0.17%3.8700%0 0.00 C. Cash $65,039,212.59 0.95%1.65%6 0 0.00 3 Yield to Maturity on Portfolio at End-of-Quarter = 4.72% 3 Weighted Average Days to Maturity on Portfolio at End-of-Quarter = 259 3 Weighted Duration (yr) at End-of-Quarter =0.65 1. Excludes the funds managed by PFM. 2. Data is provided by SymPro. 3. Excludes: EBRCS Bonds, Futuris Public Entity Trust, Benefit Trust ST Fund, etc. 4. Data provided by Allspring Global Investments. 5. Monthly Distribution Yield as of the quarter end. 6. Wells Fargo Bank Average Earnings Credit Rate on Investable Balance for the quarter. LAIF is subject to a one day call of principal provision. CAMP, CalTRUST Liquidity Fund and Federated provide a same day liquidity provision. WEIGHTED Exhibit II 0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 2.50% 3.00% 3.50% 4.00% 4.50% 5.00% 5.50% 6.00% Yield to Maturity as of December 31, 2023 Treasurer PFM LAIF Allspring CAMP US Bank Exhibit III CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL 12/31/239/30/23CHANGE IN VALUETYPEPAR VALUEPAR VALUEFROM PREV. QTR.% CHANGEA. Investments Managed by Treasurer's Office 1. U.S. Treasuries (STRIPS, Bills, Notes) $755,256,000.00 $775,904,000.00 ($20,648,000.00)-2.66% 2. U.S. Agencies Federal Home Loan Banks $1,120,117,000.00 $1,273,526,327.55 (153,409,327.55)-12.05% Federal National Mortgage Association $364,400,000.00 $224,400,000.00 140,000,000.0062.39% Federal Farm Credit Banks $563,970,000.00 $488,970,000.00 75,000,000.0015.34% Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation 653,000,000.00 388,000,000.00 265,000,000.0068.30% Subtotal $2,701,487,000.00 $2,374,896,327.55 326,590,672.4513.75% 3. Supranationals $588,000,000.00 $463,000,000.00 125,000,000.0021.26% 4. Money Market Instruments Commercial Paper $1,552,450,000.00 $978,139,000.00 574,311,000.0058.71% Negotiable Certificates of Deposit $175,000,000.00 $135,000,000.00 40,000,000.0029.63% Time Deposit3,404.12 3,404.12 0.000.00% Subtotal $1,727,453,404.12 $1,104,825,564.59 622,627,839.5356.36% 5. Corporate Notes $171,445,000.00 $171,445,000.00 0.000.00%TOTAL (Section A)5,943,641,404.12 4,898,387,731.67 1,053,570,511.9821.51%B. Investments Managed by Outside Contractors 1. PFM$77,246,529.93 $75,266,134.13 1,980,395.802.63% 2. Local Agency Investment Fund $243,018,219.68 $228,629,277.66 14,388,942.026.29% 3. Allspring Global Investments $44,636,239.69 $43,915,777.22 720,462.481.64% 4. CAMP $487,574,429.35 $386,567,320.25 101,007,109.1026.13% 5. CalTRUST (Liquidity Fund) $0.00 $0.00 0.000.00% 6. US Bank (Federated Tax Free Cash) $11,904,591.21 $12,990,311.65 (1,085,720.44)-8.36% 7. Other a. EBRCS Bond $863,700.20 $863,700.20 0.000.00%TOTAL (Section B)865,243,710.06 749,411,491.70 115,832,218.3615.46%C. Cash1$65,039,212.59 $75,651,087.86 (10,611,875.27)-14.03%* GRAND TOTAL (FOR A , B, & C)$6,873,924,326.77 $5,723,450,311.23 $1,150,474,015.5420.10%* Excludes the Futuris Public Entity Trust of the Contra Costa Community College District Retirement Board of Authority1. Negative cash balance was due to one-business day delay in reporting daily cash balance by Wells Fargo Bank. There was no bank account overdraft. Exhibit IV Quarterly PMIA PMIA Ave. Apportionment Quarter to Date Effective Rate Yield Yield Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)4.00%3.81%3.929 10/1/23 - 12/31/23 12/31/23 High Ave.Low Federal Funds Target Rate*2 5.5000%5.5000%5.5000%5.5000% Federal Fund Rates Index*3 5.3100%5.3100%5.3100%5.3100% 6-Month Treasury Bill 5.1912%5.3425%5.2473%5.1388% SOFR180A Index*4 5.3473%5.3473%5.2724%5.1730% Fidelity Money Market Fund*5 5.1000% *1. For reference only. *2. Short-term interest rate targeted by the Federal Reserve's FOMC as part of its monetary policy. *3. The ICAP Fed Funds Rates are posted by the ICAP Fed Funds Desk. These rates are general indications and are determined by using the levels posted to the desk by highly rated large domestic and international banks. *4. 180 day average SOFR Secured Overnight Financing Rate. *5 Ticker SPRXX: 7 day yield at the quarter end. INDICES AND BENCHMARKS*1 AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2023 Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # TOYOTA MCC - CORP 89236TGT6 2/13/2025 1.800 13,150,000.00 12,718,601.10 13,143,010.34 Make-whole call +10bps until 2/13/25 bullet 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ELQ49 6/30/2025 0.700 20,000,000.00 18,853,300.00 20,000,000.00 Callable on and after 6/30/21 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3136G4XK4 6/30/2025 0.650 20,000,000.00 18,923,920.00 20,000,000.00 Quarterly: Last call on 12/30/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3136G4S87 8/27/2025 0.650 10,000,000.00 9,402,510.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 8/27/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EL7K4 9/16/2025 0.550 10,000,000.00 9,361,540.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 9/16/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GWWT9 9/30/2025 0.550 10,000,000.00 9,347,100.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 9/30/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EL7K4 9/16/2025 0.550 10,000,000.00 9,361,540.00 9,999,313.23 Callable on and after 9/16/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GWUE4 9/30/2025 0.500 10,000,000.00 9,338,800.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 9/30/22 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14316HAC6 8/15/2025 0.500 26,675.57 26,395.85 26,641.45 10% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GW3Z7 10/28/2025 0.600 10,000,000.00 9,317,410.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 10/28/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GWVC7 9/29/2025 0.500 10,000,000.00 9,339,820.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 9/29/22 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3136G46N8 10/29/2025 0.600 10,000,000.00 9,316,400.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 10/29/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMFR8 11/3/2025 0.540 10,000,000.00 9,300,110.00 9,993,931.67 Callable on and after 11/3/22 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXEJ9 11/24/2025 0.640 10,000,000.00 9,296,230.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 11/24/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXFA7 11/26/2025 0.650 10,000,000.00 9,296,040.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 11/26/21 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135G06K4 12/17/2025 0.650 10,000,000.00 9,272,910.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/17/21 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135G06Q1 12/30/2025 0.640 10,000,000.00 9,258,140.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/30/21 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14316NAC3 12/15/2025 0.340 36,543.46 35,872.19 36,516.78 10% deal call 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HEU2 2/8/2024 0.350 140,000.00 139,242.18 139,996.69 Make-whole call +5bps until 2/8/24 6911 APPLE INC - CORP 037833EB2 2/8/2026 0.700 10,000,000.00 9,261,690.00 9,997,527.13 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 1/8/26 8177 APPLE INC - CORP 037833EB2 2/8/2026 0.700 10,000,000.00 9,261,690.00 9,994,616.89 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 1/8/26 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AKXB7 2/11/2026 0.580 10,000,000.00 9,243,750.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 5/11/21 8177 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PBY1 2/16/2025 0.563 245,000.00 243,357.52 245,000.00 Callable on and after 2/16/24 6911 CHARLES SCHWAB - CORP 808513BN4 3/18/2024 0.750 245,000.00 242,483.61 244,991.27 Make-whole call +7bps; Callable on and after 2/18/2024 6911 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMUK6 3/25/2026 1.050 10,000,000.00 9,297,970.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/25/22 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14314QAC8 2/17/2026 0.520 102,063.55 99,799.37 102,008.60 10% collateral call 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ALXV1 4/22/2026 1.100 10,000,000.00 9,294,880.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 4/22/22 8177 CITIBANK NA - CORP 172967MX6 5/1/2025 0.981 160,000.00 157,284.64 160,000.00 Make-whole call +10bps; Callable after 5/1/24 6911 AMAZON - CORP 023135BX3 5/12/2026 1.000 10,000,000.00 9,237,600.00 9,984,776.56 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 4/12/26 8177 AMAZON - CORP 023135BX3 5/12/2026 1.000 5,000,000.00 4,618,800.00 4,990,704.75 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 4/12/26 8177 AMAZON - CORP 023135BX3 5/12/2026 1.000 5,000,000.00 4,618,800.00 4,990,699.58 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 4/12/26 8177 UNITED HEALTH - CORP 91324PEB4 5/15/2024 0.550 260,000.00 255,302.58 259,966.33 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 5/15/22 6911 UNITED HEALTH - CORP 91324PEB4 5/15/2024 0.550 260,000.00 255,302.58 259,966.33 Call on and anytime after 5/15/22 6911 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PCH7 6/1/2025 0.824 190,000.00 185,931.72 190,000.00 Make-whole call +7.5bps; Callable after 6/1/24 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AMMY5 6/10/2026 1.050 10,000,000.00 9,243,530.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/10/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMH21 6/15/2026 0.900 10,000,000.00 9,204,890.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 6/15/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AMYJ5 6/30/2026 1.000 10,000,000.00 9,215,470.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 6/30/22 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMP22 6/30/2026 0.910 10,000,000.00 9,194,410.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 6/30/23 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AN2Z2 6/30/2026 1.000 10,000,000.00 9,215,470.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/30/21 8177 APPLE INC - CORP 037833EB2 2/8/2026 0.700 10,000,000.00 9,261,690.00 9,988,031.79 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 1/8/26 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14317DAC4 6/15/2026 0.550 276,544.63 267,930.54 276,499.14 10% collateral call 6911 UNILEVER CAPITAL - CORP 904764BN6 8/12/2024 0.626 125,000.00 121,372.75 125,000.00 Make-whole call +5bps until 5/12/22 6911 UNILEVER CAPITAL - CORP 904764BN6 8/12/2024 0.626 125,000.00 121,372.75 125,000.00 Make-whole call +5bps until 8/12/22 Callable afterward 6911 JOHNSON & JOHNS - CORP 478160CN2 9/1/2025 0.550 15,295,000.00 14,328,937.21 15,241,133.09 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 8/1/25 8177 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP 02665WDY4 8/9/2024 0.750 100,000.00 97,207.40 99,986.30 Make-whole call +7.5bps until 8/9/24 6911 CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP 14913R2P1 9/13/2024 0.600 370,000.00 358,192.93 369,882.48 Make-whole call +22bps until 9/13/24 6911 BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP 06406RAX5 10/25/2024 0.850 355,000.00 342,741.14 354,937.18 Callable on and after 9/25/24 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130APDQ5 10/28/2026 1.250 10,000,000.00 9,185,010.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 1/28/22 8177 AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP 025816CG2 7/30/2024 2.500 325,000.00 319,268.95 327,514.70 Callable on and after 6/30/24 6911 AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP 025816CG2 7/30/2024 2.500 100,000.00 98,236.60 100,773.75 Callable on and after 6/30/24 6911 TARGET CORP - CORP 87612EBD7 7/1/2024 3.500 250,000.00 247,814.25 253,024.46 Make-whole call +15bps until 7/1/24 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130APW43 12/2/2026 1.500 10,000,000.00 9,225,230.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 3/2/2022 8711 BANK OF AMERICA - CORP 06051GKE8 12/6/2025 1.530 500,000.00 480,674.50 500,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 12/6/24 Quarterly call after 6911 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENHC7 12/14/2026 1.600 10,000,000.00 9,244,320.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/14/22 8177 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENHC7 12/14/2026 1.600 10,000,000.00 9,244,320.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/14/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQBP7 12/23/2024 1.200 10,000,000.00 9,646,510.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 3/23/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQ5X7 12/30/2024 1.150 10,000,000.00 9,636,780.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 3/30/22 8177 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP 02665WEA5 1/13/2025 1.500 300,000.00 289,433.40 299,918.37 Make-whole call +7.5bps 6911 CITIGROUP INC - CORP 17327CAN3 1/25/2026 2.014 85,000.00 81,677.61 85,000.00 Make-whole call +12bps until 1/25/25 then quarterly call 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQJH7 1/28/2027 1.750 10,000,000.00 9,292,360.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly: starts 2/28/22 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENNG1 2/8/2027 1.860 10,000,000.00 9,315,990.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 2/8/23 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQRH8 2/25/2027 2.000 10,000,000.00 9,346,980.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 5/25/22 8177 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BR3 2/6/2026 1.746 150,000.00 144,136.80 150,000.00 Callable on and after 2/6/25 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BM4 3/30/2026 2.901 75,000.00 72,868.95 76,239.10 Callable on and after 3/30/25 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFC1 2/7/2025 1.875 105,000.00 101,359.13 104,998.84 Make-whole call +10bps 6911 MORGAN STANLEY - CORP 61747YEM3 2/18/2026 2.630 450,000.00 435,519.00 450,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 2/18/25; call anytime after 1/18/26 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BM4 3/30/2026 2.901 400,000.00 388,634.40 404,407.35 Callable on and after 3/30/25 6911 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PCV6 2/24/2025 2.595 400,000.00 387,369.60 400,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 2/24/25; call anytime after 1/24/26 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AR2H3 3/4/2027 2.770 10,000,000.00 9,572,080.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly: starts 4/4/22 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENSK7 3/21/2025 2.190 10,000,000.00 9,686,300.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/21/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXPZ1 9/27/2024 2.200 10,000,000.00 9,794,110.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly: starts 4/27/22 8177 HOME DEPOT - CORP 437076CM2 4/15/2025 2.700 60,000.00 58,519.20 59,955.59 Make-whole call +10bps until 3/15/25; call anytime after 3/15/25 6911 AMAZON - CORP 023135CE4 4/13/2025 3.000 145,000.00 141,871.05 144,901.38 Make-whole call +5bps until 4/13/25 bullet 6911 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PCZ7 4/26/2026 4.080 225,000.00 221,339.25 225,000.00 Make-whole call +20bps until 4/26/25; call anytime afterward 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ARPD7 4/28/2027 3.375 9,900,000.00 9,653,024.70 9,900,000.00 Quarterly: starts 4/28/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXRS5 4/29/2025 3.100 10,000,000.00 9,784,360.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 7/29/22 8177 CINTAS CORP - CORP 17252MAP5 5/1/2025 3.450 160,000.00 157,128.00 159,984.33 Make-whole call +15bps until 4/1/25; call anytime afterward 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFE7 6/15/2025 3.450 70,000.00 68,540.71 69,991.17 Make-whole call +15bps until 6/15/25 bullet 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXXS8 6/27/2025 3.250 10,000,000.00 9,834,570.00 10,000,000.00 Semi Annually: starts 6/27/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ASN47 7/26/2024 3.320 10,000,000.00 9,901,310.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 IBM - CORP 459200KS9 7/27/2025 4.000 540,000.00 534,032.46 540,000.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 7/27/25 bullet 6911 TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP 89788MAH5 7/28/2026 4.260 235,000.00 230,120.93 235,000.00 Make-whole call +20bps until 7/28/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ASQR3 7/26/2024 3.570 10,000,000.00 9,915,080.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP 194162AM5 8/15/2025 3.100 120,000.00 117,366.24 119,940.63 Make-whole call +5bps until 8/15/25 bullet 6911 WALMART INC - CORP 931142EW9 9/9/2025 3.900 285,000.00 282,167.67 284,887.69 Make-whole call +10bps until 9/9/25 bullet 6911 HOME DEPOT - CORP 437076CR1 9/15/2025 4.000 75,000.00 74,305.35 74,984.59 Make-whole call +7.5bps until 8/15/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GX2E3 9/20/2024 4.050 10,000,000.00 9,924,140.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 3/20/23 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AT3P0 9/14/2027 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,908,590.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly call: starts 10/14/22 8177 WALMART INC - CORP 931142EW9 9/9/2025 3.900 11,000,000.00 10,890,682.00 10,876,839.85 Make-whole call +10bps until 9/9/25 bullet 8177 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP 539830BU2 10/15/2025 4.950 120,000.00 120,935.52 119,794.35 Make-whole call +10bps until 9/15/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GX4M3 10/25/2024 5.080 10,000,000.00 9,983,690.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 1/25/23 8177 UNITED HEALTH - CORP 91324PEN8 10/15/2025 5.150 80,000.00 80,872.40 79,995.65 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 10/15/25 bullet 6911 PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP 693475BH7 10/28/2025 5.671 240,000.00 239,877.36 240,000.00 Annual call: starts 10/28/24 6911 TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP 89788MAJ1 10/28/2026 5.900 250,000.00 252,054.25 250,000.00 Make-whole call +25bps until 10/28/25 6911 CARMAX - ABS 14318UAD3 8/16/2027 5.340 380,000.00 381,105.42 379,910.89 10% collateral call 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFF4 10/30/2025 5.450 70,000.00 70,700.77 69,942.76 Make-whole call +15bps 6911 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL - CORP 438516CH7 11/1/2024 4.850 325,000.00 323,864.12 324,976.95 Make-whole call +10bps until 11/1/24 bullet 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BX0 11/4/2026 5.751 105,000.00 106,621.62 105,000.00 One time call: 11/4/25 6911 COMCAST - CORP 20030NDZ1 11/7/2025 5.250 100,000.00 101,057.80 99,983.35 Make-whole call +15bps until 11/7/25 bullet 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GY2W1 8/25/2025 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,974,960.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 8/25/23 8177 LINDE INC CT - CORP 53522KAB9 12/5/2025 4.700 530,000.00 530,429.30 529,632.18 Make-whole call +10bps until 11/5/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GY6L1 6/18/2026 4.750 15,000,000.00 14,938,665.00 15,000,000.00 One time call: 6/20/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GY6M9 6/21/2027 4.800 15,000,000.00 14,925,225.00 15,000,000.00 One time call: 6/21/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYA69 9/27/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,910.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 9/27/23 8177 IBRD - SUPRA 45906M3M1 12/27/2027 5.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 6/27/24 8177 CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP 14913R3B1 1/6/2026 4.800 175,000.00 175,999.78 174,970.63 Make-whole call: +10bps until 1/26/26 bullet 6911 PEPSICO INC - CORP 713448CY2 7/17/2025 3.500 300,000.00 295,123.20 294,560.63 Make-whole call +20bps until 4/17/25 call anytime afterward 6911 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP 693475BL8 1/26/2027 4.758 45,000.00 44,645.63 45,000.00 Semi-annual call: starts 1/26/26 6911 MERCEDES BENZ AUTO - ABS 58770AAC7 11/15/2027 4.510 95,000.00 94,392.86 94,988.60 5% collateral call 6911 INTEL CORP-CORP 458140AS9 7/29/2025 3.700 375,000.00 369,043.50 370,022.92 Make-whole call +25bps until 4/29/25 call anytime afterward 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BZ5 1/26/2026 4.857 45,000.00 44,786.84 45,000.00 Callable on and after 1/26/25 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GADZ1 1/26/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,996,470.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS 891940AC2 9/15/2027 4.630 170,000.00 168,975.07 169,999.92 5% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAEH0 7/30/2024 4.800 10,000,000.00 9,977,660.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/30/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYFD9 1/30/2025 4.770 10,000,000.00 9,970,240.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/30/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYDB5 10/30/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 10,002,580.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/30/24 8177 EXXON MOBIL - CORP 30231GAT9 3/1/2026 3.043 550,000.00 534,089.60 535,344.43 Make-whole call +20bps until 12/1/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYGH9 2/6/2025 4.800 10,000,000.00 9,971,390.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 2/6/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135G06V0 8/28/2025 4.125 4,400,000.00 4,377,159.60 4,363,193.39 Quarterly call: starts 11/28/22 8177 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFH0 3/13/2026 4.450 60,000.00 59,909.10 59,969.71 Make-whole call +15bps until 2/13/26 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AUUQ5 2/13/2025 5.020 10,000,000.00 9,994,730.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 2/13/24 8177 PEPSICO INC - CORP 713448FQ6 2/13/2026 4.550 225,000.00 225,899.33 224,907.75 Make-whole call +10bps until 1/13/26 call anytime afterward 6911 HDMOT - ABS 41285JAD0 12/15/2027 5.050 120,000.00 119,094.95 119,987.92 10% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYHZ8 2/28/2028 5.100 10,000,000.00 9,972,980.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 2/28/24 8177 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP 194162AQ6 3/2/2026 4.800 185,000.00 187,333.59 184,844.96 Make-whole call +5bps until 3/2/26 bullet 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BNGT5 1/25/2026 2.745 300,000.00 289,101.30 282,515.63 1% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BRQJ7 7/25/2026 2.570 300,000.00 286,480.80 278,976.56 1% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137FJXQ7 8/25/2025 3.750 347,710.68 341,613.92 336,790.39 1% collateral call 6911 FORDO - ABS 344928AD8 2/15/2028 4.650 185,000.00 184,316.43 184,980.70 10% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAGF2 4/10/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,989,330.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/10/23 8177 DCENT 2023 A1 A MTGE - ABS 254683CY9 3/15/2028 4.310 225,000.00 223,428.83 224,986.95 Callable 6911 GMCAR - ABS 362583AD8 2/16/2028 4.470 120,000.00 119,227.92 119,996.70 10% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAGN5 4/12/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,989,410.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/12/23 8177 FHMS - MBS 3137BSP72 8/25/2026 2.653 525,000.00 500,938.20 501,108.40 1% collateral call 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AVR87 1/26/2024 5.125 10,000,000.00 9,998,300.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAGV7 4/26/2024 5.125 10,000,000.00 9,994,150.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/26/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYS60 6/17/2024 5.200 10,000,000.00 9,980,920.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 8/17/23 8177 FHMS - MBS 3137BRQJ7 7/25/2026 2.570 350,000.00 334,227.60 332,800.78 1% collateral call 6911 TAOT 2023 B A3 - MBS 891941AD8 2/15/2028 4.710 260,000.00 259,601.16 259,985.47 5% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BTUM1 11/25/2026 3.347 254,618.86 246,771.25 246,781.37 1% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYTE2 5/30/2028 5.200 10,000,000.00 9,971,330.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 5/30/24 8177 HAROT - ABS 437927AC0 11/15/2027 4.930 185,000.00 185,866.54 184,970.03 10% collateral call 6911 IADB - SUPRA 45818WEP7 6/15/2028 4.300 10,000,000.00 10,004,950.00 9,984,405.56 One time call: 6/15/26 8177 IADB - SUPRA 45818WEP7 6/15/2028 4.300 10,000,000.00 10,004,950.00 9,946,533.33 One time call: 6/15/26 8177 IBRD - SUPRA 45906M4E8 6/26/2028 4.500 10,000,000.00 10,069,470.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 6/26/26 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAHX2 6/28/2024 5.330 10,000,000.00 10,002,010.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 12/28/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYVD1 6/26/2026 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,988,170.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts6/26/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAJ69 7/10/2026 5.375 10,000,000.00 9,997,300.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/10/24 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EPPV1 7/14/2028 5.430 10,000,000.00 10,041,570.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and anytime after 7/14/25 8177 ALLYA - ABS 02007WAC2 5/15/2028 5.460 165,000.00 166,894.70 164,971.87 10% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAJA0 7/19/2024 5.400 10,000,000.00 9,991,570.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/16/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAJH5 7/26/2024 5.600 10,000,000.00 9,982,150.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/26/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYXM9 7/26/2028 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,971,380.00 10,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 7/26/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYY97 7/26/2028 5.630 15,000,000.00 14,977,680.00 15,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 7/26/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYX31 7/25/2025 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,991,440.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 4/25/24 8177 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY - CORP 94988J6D4 8/7/2026 5.450 250,000.00 254,073.25 249,811.15 Make-whole call +15bps until 7/7/26 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYYY2 8/14/2028 6.000 10,000,000.00 9,981,750.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 2/14/24 8177 BANK OF AMERICA - CORP 06428CAA2 8/18/2026 5.526 350,000.00 356,460.65 350,000.00 Callable on and anytime after 7/17/26 6911 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 FITAT - ABS 31680EAD3 8/15/2028 5.530 510,000.00 517,074.21 509,968.38 10% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYZ96 8/28/2028 6.150 10,000,000.00 10007980.000 9,995,341.67 Monthly call: starts 11/28/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1CF8 9/18/2028 5.000 10,000,000.00 10021080.000 9,897,520.06 Annual call: starts 9/18/24 8177 IBRD - SUPRA 45906M4H1 9/29/2028 5.750 10,000,000.00 10044390.000 9,988,138.89 Annual call: starts 9/29/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1ER0 9/27/2028 5.875 8,000,000.00 8008600.000 8,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 9/27/24 8177 CITIBANK NA - CORP 17325FBA5 9/29/2025 5.864 255,000.00 259213.880 255,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 8/29/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1FG3 10/11/2028 5.750 10,000,000.00 10,032,583.30 10,000,000.00 One time: 10/11/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1EK5 7/11/2028 5.450 10,000,000.00 10,076,710.00 10,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 7/11/25 8177 GMCAR - ABS 379930AD2 8/16/2028 5.780 160,000.00 164,057.12 159,967.14 10% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137FNWX4 7/25/2026 2.282 400,000.00 380,211.20 371,140.63 1% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1HN6 10/20/2028 5.500 10,000,000.00 10,239,240.00 10,000,000.00 One time: 10/20/25 8177 FHMS - MBS 3137FLN34 2/25/2026 3.208 350,000.00 340,350.15 333,457.03 1% collateral call 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFK3 11/13/2026 5.600 115,000.00 118,008.17 114,961.93 Make-whole call +15bps until10/13/26 call anytime afterward 6911 HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES - ABS 438123AC5 6/21/2028 5.670 85,000.00 86,776.08 84,985.03 10% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BSRE5 9/25/2026 3.120 600,000.00 571,552.20 568,289.06 1% collateral call 6911 CITIBANK NA - CORP 17325FBC1 12/4/2026 5.488 250,000.00 254,499.50 250,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 11/4/26 call anytime afterward 6911 HOME DEPOT - CORP 437076CV2 9/30/2026 4.950 155,000.00 157,220.22 154,669.57 Make-whole call +10bps until 8/30/26 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1LJ0 12/11/2028 4.750 10,000,000.00 9,977,500.00 9,913,373.33 Annual call: starts 12/11/24 8177 BofA CC - ABS 05522RDH8 11/15/2028 4.980 145,000.00 146,687.22 144,980.53 collateral call 6911 966,204,156.75 935,781,906.22 965,456,934.51 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V (a) DESCRIPTION CUSIP MATURITY DATE PAR MARKET*COST PROVISIONS ($)($)($) AMCAR 2022-2 A2A 03065WAB1 12/18/2025 105,256.96 105,062.64 105,248.99 10% collateral call AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP 02665WEQ0 10/3/2025 500,000.00 515,703.84 499,535.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 10/3/25 bullet AMXCA 2021-1 A 02582JJR2 11/16/2026 800,000.00 771,493.76 749,656.25 cleanup call APPLE INC 037833CU2 5/11/2024 700,000.00 696,229.88 684,145.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 3/11/24; Call anytime after BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP 06406HCV9 5/15/2024 700,000.00 697,161.11 686,420.00 Callable on and after 4/15/24 BLACKROCK INC 09247XAL5 3/18/2024 500,000.00 502,833.57 507,990.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 3/18/24 bullet BMWLT 2023-1 A3 05593AAC3 11/25/2025 700,000.00 699,717.76 699,507.81 5% deal call CARMX 2023-4 A2A 14318XAB1 12/15/2026 350,000.00 353,690.20 349,976.27 10% collateral call CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP 14913UAB6 8/11/2025 500,000.00 513,644.49 500,875.00 Make-whole call +10bps CITIBANK NA 17325FAS7 1/23/2024 600,000.00 608,940.46 600,924.00 Make-whole call +20bps until 12/23/23; Call anytime after DCENT 2017-4 A 254683BZ7 4/15/2024 750,000.00 744,373.68 737,900.39 Collateral call EXXON MOBIL CORP 30231GAC6 3/15/2024 579,000.00 581,575.93 570,523.44 Make-whole call +7bps until 12/15/23; Call anytime after FORDL 2022-A A3 34528LAD7 5/15/2025 279,315.31 278,456.04 272,637.93 5% deal call GMALT 2023-1 A2A 362541AB0 6/20/2025 235,680.17 235,875.85 235,660.92 10% deal call HAROT 2023-1 A2 43815JAB9 10/21/2025 394,100.99 394,018.35 394,077.30 10% collateral call HAROT 2023-3 A2 43815QAB3 3/18/2026 400,000.00 402,005.50 400,375.00 10% collateral call HART 2022-C A2A 44933DAB7 11/17/2025 264,042.29 264,474.73 264,025.94 5% collateral call on 12/15/26 HART 2023-A A2A 448979AB0 12/15/2025 202,057.59 202,239.01 202,045.91 5% collateral call HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC 438516CH7 11/1/2024 750,000.00 753,407.19 749,872.50 Make-whole call +10bps until 11/1/24 bullet INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPM 459058HC0 8/6/2024 1,000,000.00 1,010,377.29 1,002,115.13 Foating: O/N SOFR +30bps JDOT 2022 A3 47787JAC2 9/15/2026 422,520.82 413,519.15 406,560.76 10% collateral call JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 46625HKC3 1/23/2025 700,000.00 694,972.19 681,898.00 Callable on and after 10/23/24 MBALT 2021-B A4 58769KAE4 3/15/2027 285,000.00 283,298.06 273,633.40 5% deal call MBART 2022-1 A3 58768PAC8 8/16/2027 400,000.00 401,494.62 399,015.63 5% collateral call MBART 2023-1 A2 58770AAB9 1/15/2026 60,021.24 60,057.08 60,019.17 5% collateral call MORGAN STANLEY 61761JVL0 10/23/2024 700,000.00 695,803.02 688,513.00 Make-whole call +25bps untilv10/23/24; bullet NAROT 2022-B A2 65480JAB6 8/16/2025 94,444.86 94,331.52 93,714.39 5% collateral call NAROT 2022-B A3 65480JAC4 5/17/2027 400,000.00 397,846.53 393,156.25 5% collateral call NAROT 2022-B A3 65480JAC4 5/17/2027 75,000.00 73,724.02 73,666.99 5% collateral call NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORP 63743HFF4 10/30/2025 700,000.00 713,501.28 703,556.00 Make-whole call +15bps SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP 828807DG9 9/13/2024 500,000.00 491,595.29 483,340.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 6/13/24; Call anytime after TAOT 2022-A A3 89239KAC5 6/15/2026 411,680.21 400,795.25 393,460.14 5% collateral call TAOT 2023-B A2A 891941AB2 4/15/2026 221,994.13 222,184.00 221,989.00 5% collateral call TRUIST BANK 86787EBC0 4/1/2024 600,000.00 600,840.26 600,356.40 Make-whole call +15bps until 3/1/24; Call anytime after UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 91324PEM0 10/15/2024 700,000.00 706,489.14 699,692.00 Make-whole call +10bps until 10/15/24 bullet VWALT 2022-A A2 92868AAB1 10/21/2024 5,106.13 5,108.02 5,105.73 10% deal call VWALT 2022-A A3 92868AAC9 7/21/2025 350,000.00 347,662.84 342,083.98 10% deal call VZMT 2022-2 A 92348KAH6 7/20/2028 800,000.00 770,976.72 756,968.75 One time call: 2/20/23 WELLS FARGO BANK NA 94988J6B8 8/1/2025 300,000.00 309,623.16 299,784.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 7/1/25; Call anytime after WOART 2020-B A3 98163WAC0 5/15/2025 19,337.71 19,301.36 18,935.84 10% collateral call WOLS 2022-A A3 98163NAC0 2/18/2025 416,917.66 414,915.94 407,813.87 5% deal call 18,471,476.07 18,449,320.74 18,216,776.10 *Based Market Value + Accrued Interest CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ALLSPRING GLOBAL INVESTMENTS STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0565 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to provide long term acute care services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #77-032-5 with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #77-032-5 with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento,LLC,a limited liability company,in an amount not to exceed $600,000,to provide long term acute care (LTAC)services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $600,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized non-physician provider care services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing LTAC services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission, values, and long-term objectives since February 2017. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.The nature of the LTAC services needed is complex and requires seamless coordination,integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of five (5)LTAC providers in CCHP’s CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0565,Version:1 and collaboration with existing programs and systems.There is a total of five (5)LTAC providers in CCHP’s service area and CCHP contracts with four (4)of these providers.This contractor has been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on November 29, 2023. On February 2,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #77-032-4 with Vibra Hospital of Sacramento,LLC,in an amount not to exceed $600,000,to provide LTAC services for CCHP members and county recipients for the period February 1, 2021 through January 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #77-032-5 will allow the contractor to continue providing LTAC services for CCHP members and county recipients through January 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved certain specialized long term acute care services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0566 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with California Mental Health Services Authority in an amount not to exceed $240,791 to act as fiscal agent for the provision of specialty mental health services for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025. (100% Mental Health Realignment) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Participation Agreement #74-585-1 with California Mental Health Services Authority ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Participation Agreement #74-585-1 containing mutual indemnification with California Mental Health Services Authority,a government agency,in an amount not to exceed $240,791,to act as fiscal agent for the provision of specialty mental health services for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county,for the period from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this agreement will result in budgeted annual expenditures of up to $240,791 over a two-year period and will be funded 100% by Mental Health Realignment funds. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this agreement is for the contractor to act as a fiscal agent to perform fund transfers on behalf of counties to allow foster children who are placed outside of their county of original jurisdiction to access specialty mental health services in a timely manner.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3,government agencies are exempt from solicitation requirements.This agreement was approved by Health Services Personnel to ensure there is no conflict with labor relations. On October 23,2018,the Board of Supervisors approved Participation Agreement #74-585 with California Mental Health Services Authority,in an amount not to exceed $398,747,to act as fiscal agent for the provision of specialty mental health services for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county,for the period July 1, 2018 until terminated. Approval of Participation Agreement #74-585-1 terminates the prior agreement on June 30,2023 and allows CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0566,Version:1 Approval of Participation Agreement #74-585-1 terminates the prior agreement on June 30,2023 and allows the contractor to continue providing services through June 30,2025.This contract includes mutual indemnification.The Department did not receive the agreement from the contractor until November 28,2023, causing a delay in processing of agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this participation agreement is not approved,County will not be able to ensure timely access to care for Contra Costa County dependents placed out of county for specialty mental health services. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0567 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Kerecis LLC in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to procure fish skin and biological dressing supplies for the Operating Department at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center for the period from February 1, 2024 through July 31, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Directors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Purchase Order with Kerecis LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with Kerecis LLC in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to procure fish skin and biological dressing supplies for the Operating Department at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) for the period from February 1, 2024 through July 31, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: This action will result in expenditures of up to $600,000 and will be funded by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Kerecis's trademarked fish skin has little processing to preserve its similarity to human skin as opposed to animal-derived skin replacements. Human and pig tissues are used to make the majority of skin replacements. These are not the ideal options because thorough processing is necessary to eliminate the chance of disease transmission. This intense antiviral treatment removes most of the material's natural components, setting it apart from human skin. Research has shown that fish skin is more structurally similar to human skin than other skin substitutes. Since there is no known risk of viral infection transmission, fish skin is processed as minimally as possible to retain its constituent parts and structural integrity. Fish skin in its intact state is used to treat chronic wounds, including pressure ulcers, vascular ulcers, diabetic wounds, draining wounds, trauma wounds, and surgical wounds. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0567,Version:1 Kerecis LLC pricing is provided by the Vizient, Inc. Group Purchasing Organization. Approval of this purchase order will allow this vendor to provide fish skin and biological dressing supplies to CCRMC through July 31, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, CCRMC will not be able to provide the surgical needs of the general population of Contra Costa County. This can lead to delays or cancellation of surgeries, and lead to negative outcomes for our patients. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0568 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Health Management Associates, Inc., effective February 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $300,000 to a new payment limit of $600,000 for additional actuarial consulting services for the Contra Costa Health Plan with no change in the term ending September 30, 2024. (100% Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #23-773-3 with Health Management Associates, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #23-773-3 with Health Management Associates, Inc., a corporation, effective February 1, 2024, to amend Contract #23-773-2, to increase the payment limit by $300,000, from $300,000 to a new payment limit of $600,000 with no change in the original term of October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional annual expenditures of up to $300,000 and will be funded by 100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II as budgeted by the department in FY 2023-24. BACKGROUND: Health Management Associates, Inc has been providing actuarial services to the Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) since October 2022. The contractor’s services include analysis of CCHP historical claims data to determine the required Incurred But Not Reported Reserves (IBNR), assist in the completion of the annual Rate Development Template (RDT) deliverable to the State and provide comprehensive analysis of premium rating files from the State. On August 15, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-773-2 with Health Management Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $300,000 to provide actuarial consulting services for the Contra Costa Health Plan, for the period from October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2024. Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #23-773-3 will allow the contractor to provide additional CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0568,Version:1 actuarial consulting services related to the State CalAim implementation and the transition to a Single Plan Medi-Cal Model in Contra Costa County, through September 30, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, CCHP will not have the actuarial services required to meet State requirements or become a Single Plan Medi-Cal Model. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0569 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Northern California Cornea Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $900,000 to provide ophthalmology services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and county recipients for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #27-779-8 with Northern California Cornea Associates, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County Contract #27-779-8 with Northern California Cornea Associates,Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $900,000,to provide ophthalmology services to Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and county recipients, for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $900,000 over a three-year period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues. (No rate increase) BACKGROUND: CCHP has an obligation to provide certain ophthalmology services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county.This contractor has been a part of the CCHP Provider Network providing these services and fostering a deep understanding of the CCHP organizations mission,values,and long-term objectives since April 1,2009.This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.This contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3, CCHP physician services are exempt from solicitation requirements. On April 20,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-779-6 with Northern California Cornea CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0569,Version:1 On April 20,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-779-6 with Northern California Cornea Associates,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $300,000,for the provision of ophthalmology services for CCHP members and county recipients, for the period April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2024. On November 9,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment #27-779-7 with Northern California Cornea Associates,Inc.to increase the payment limit by $150,000 to a new payment limit of $450,000 to provide additional Ophthalmology services for CCHP members,with no change in the original term of April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2024. Approval of Contract #27-779-8 will allow the contractor to continue providing ophthalmology services to CCHP members and county recipients through March 31, 2027. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved,certain ophthalmology services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0606 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with Hill- Rom Company, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $161,844 to provide preventative maintenance and repair services for specialty hospital beds at Contra Costa Regional Medical and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Contract #76-832 with Hill-Rom Company, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract #76-832 with Hill-Rom Company, Inc., a corporation, in an amount not to exceed $161,844, to provide preventative maintenance and repair services for specialty hospital beds at Contra Costa Regional Medical (CCRMC) and Contra Costa Health Centers, for the period February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this contract will result in budgeted expenditures of up to $161,844 and is funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Hill-Rom Company, Inc. will provide preventative maintenance and repair of specialty hospital beds and be responsible for the quality, technical accuracy, completeness and coordination of such services at CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers. These specialty hospital beds include a highly specialized system that monitors patient vital signs such as patients’ heart and respiratory rates via bed sensors. The built-in censors provide seamless compatibility with CCRMC workflows on patient monitoring. The sensors sit under the mattress, do not attach to the patient, and check vital signs 100 times a minute and alert staff to any possible issues. The continuous patient monitoring device contains an integrated sensor in the bed frame that detects heart rate and respiratory rate through the surface and updates the readings twice per second. This information is compiled into an algorithm to create a running trend. The bed then alerts when heart rate or respiratory rate exceeds a customizable threshold. The specialty hospital beds aid CCRMC staff in identifying signs of patient deterioration so they can intervene early, which promotes safety and minimizes risk to the patient. This CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0606,Version:1 contractor’s preventative maintenance services are essential for achieving optimal results and ensuring the highest level of patient care. This contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code §§ 26227 and 31000. Health Services Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations. Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 this contractor was been approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division on September 20, 2023. Under new Contract #76-832, this contractor will provide preventative maintenance and repair services, through January 31, 2027. This contract includes limited liability provisions. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not approved, preventative maintenance and repair services required for specialty hospital beds for patient care will not be available and patients cannot be placed or re-homed from other facilities on a timely basis, putting their medical and overall care at risk. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0570 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Medline Industries, LP, effective February 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $2,116,950 for end-to-end distribution services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and Health Center locations with no change in the term ending June 30, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Amendment #76-809-1 with Medline Industries, LP ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County Contract Amendment Agreement #76-809-1 with Medline Industries, LP, an Illinois limited partnership, effective February 1, 2024, to amend Contract #76-809, to increase the payment limit by $2,116,950 for end-to- end distribution services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers with no change in the original term of December 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this amendment will result in additional of up to $2,116,950 and will be funded as budgeted by the department in the Hospital Enterprise Fund I. BACKGROUND: Medline Industries, LP is the primary distribution for medical and non-medical supplies and products for CCRMC and Health Centers. They have been awarded a Vizient Group Purchasing (GPO) Agreement for the distribution of contracted and non-contracted supplies. As a Vizient member, CCRMC and Health Centers receive enhanced value form their participation in the Medline/Vizient GPO. On December 13, 2022, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-809 with Medline Industries, LP, to commit to purchase 90% of medical supplies, surgical supplies, laboratory supplies, diagnostic imaging supplies, cleaning supplies, disaster supplies and miscellaneous minor equipment for CCRMC and Health Center for the period December 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025. This distribution agreement allows the department to receive discounted prices and rebates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0570,Version:1 Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #76-809-1 will allow the contractor to provide additional end-to- end distribution services including daily inventory, removal of recalled products, product replenishment, quality control and annual physical inventory, through June 30, 2025. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this amendment is not approved, distribution of vital medical supplies would be negatively impacted, and patient care services compromised across the County health system. CCRMC’s current staffing complement is not sufficient to receive and distribute the daily bulk shipments and replenish the 120 medical supply carts at CCRMC and Health Centers. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0616 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay the Virtusa Corporation an amount not to exceed $45,617 for a compliance reporting software subscription for the period from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024, as recommended by the Health Services Director. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Directors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Payment for Subscription Provided by Virtusa Corporation ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to pay the Virtusa Corporation up to $45,617 for compliance reporting software subscription for the period from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this action will result in an expenditure of up to $45,617 and will be funded by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues. BACKGROUND: Virtusa Corporation’s CareDiscovery Quality Measures (CDQM) software is used by Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Health Centers for compliance reporting to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The data submitted through the platform meets the requirements established by CMS' Inpatient and Outpatient Hospital Quality Reporting programs for clinical quality measures and accreditation purposes. Contra Costa Health Information Technology staff had been working with Virtusa Corporation since early 2023 to establish an agreement ahead of the December 2023 software subscription expiration. Unfortunately, an agreement could not be reached with Virtusa regarding the business associate addendum. CCRMC and Health Centers require access to the CDQM software to ensure compliance reporting requirements are met while an agreement with a new vendor for 2025 is established. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0616,Version:1 If this action is not approved, CCRMC will not have access to the software needed to submit data for compliance reporting to CMS. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0571 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the new medical staff, affiliates, and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, medical staff advancement and voluntary resignations as recommended by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, and by the Health Services Director. (No fiscal impact) Attachments:1. October List approved 11.7.23, 2. Revised October List Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Rescind Prior Board Action of November 7, 2023 (C.57) & Approve Medical Staff Appointments and Reappointments as of October 17, 2023 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RESCIND prior Board action of November 7, 2023 (C.57), which approved the October list of medical staff appointments and reappointments; and APPROVE the new medical staff, affiliates, and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, medical staff advancement, and voluntary resignations as recommended by the Medical Staff Executive Committee, at their October 17, 2023 meeting, and by the Health Services Director. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this action. BACKGROUND: The Medical Staff Executive committee recommended Alexa Lomongsod, NP at their October 17, 2023 meeting and the nurse practitioner was not included on the October List in error. The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has requested that evidence of Board of Supervisors approval for each Medical Staff member be placed in his or her Credentials File. The above recommendations for appointment/reappointment were reviewed by the Credentials Committee and approved by the Medical Executive Committee at their October 17, 2023 meeting. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved, the Contra Costa Regional Medical and Contra Costa Health Centers' medical staff would not be appropriately credentialed and not be in compliance with The Joint Commission on CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0571,Version:1 Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ A. Applications for Staff Membership Applicant Department/ Speciality Reviewer Lin, Kywa, DO Internal Medicine-Neurology Veda Bhatt, MD B. Applications for Staff Affiliation Applicant Department Reviewer Kiruuta, Paul, NP DFAM Humphrey C. Applications for Vrad Applicant Department Reviewer Watson, Robert, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Abdul-Wahab, Muhammad, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McQueen, Teresa, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McNair, Cierra, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Garvin, Daniel, OD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Pitts, Jennifer, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD D. Staff Advancing to Non-Provisional Provider Department Staff Status Tafoya, Matthew, MD Emergency Medicine Active Ajuria, Michael, MD Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Zaman, Warda, DO Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Loeza, Joanna, MD OB/GYN- DFAM Active E. Biennial Reappointments Provider Department Staff Status Bui, Lamson, Psy.D Psychiatry/Psychology A Butler, Kimberly, MD DFAM A Castillo, Carla, MD DFAM P Faramazyan, Alina, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Feddersen, Michael, DO Psychiatry/Psychology C Harrison, Steven, MD Surgery A Howell, Tiffany, MD Pediatrics A Josephson, Scott, MD Internal Medicine C Lau, Edward, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Anna M. Roth, R.N., M.S., M.P.H. Health Services Director Samir B. Shah, M.D., F.A.C.S Chief Executive Officer Contra Costa County Regional Medical Center and Health Centers Contra Costa Health Services CONTRA COSTA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AND HEALTH CENTERS 2500 Alhambra Avenue Martinez, California 94553-3156 Ph. 925-370-5000 Credentials Committee Recommendations 10/19/2023 1 Liss, William, MD Internal Medicine A Maitra, Sarbani, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Manuchehry, Amir, MD Anesthesia P Matthys, Andrew, MD Internal Medicine P Nguyen, Minh, MD Critical Care A Pai, Vidya, MD Pediatrics C Shah, Maulik, MD Internal Medicine C Silver, Deborah, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Tulshian, Priyanka, MD Hosptial Medicine A Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN A Wu, Katherine, MD Pediatrics C F. Biennial Renewal of Privileges-Affiliates Provider Department Staff Category Cedermaz, Heather, NP DFAM AFF Daisley, Erin, FNP DFAM AFF Humphrey, Kimberly, NP Pediatrics AFF G. Biennial Reappointments for Teleradiologists (vRad) Provider Department Reviewed By Ghani, Mazen, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller Gierbolini, Mayte, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller H. Additional Privileges Provider Department Reviewed By Boittin, Nathalie, MD OB/GYN DFAM Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN DFAM I. Voluntary Resignation Provider Department Dhatt, Jagjiwan, FNP DFAM Parish, Austin, MD Emergency Medicine Suchow, David, MD DFAM Ubhayakar, Kiran, MD Internal Medicine Credentials Committee Recommendations 10/19/2023 2 A. Applications for Staff Membership Applicant Department/ Speciality Reviewer Lin, Kywa, DO Internal Medicine-Neurology Veda Bhatt, MD B. Applications for Staff Affiliation Applicant Department Reviewer Kiruuta, Paul, NP DFAM Humphrey Lomongsod, Alexa, NP DFAM Mbanugo C. Applications for Vrad Applicant Department Reviewer Watson, Robert, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Abdul-Wahab, Muhammad, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McQueen, Teresa, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD McNair, Cierra, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Garvin, Daniel, OD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD Pitts, Jennifer, MD Diagnostic Imaging Kristin Moeller, MD D. Staff Advancing to Non-Provisional Provider Department Staff Status Tafoya, Matthew, MD Emergency Medicine Active Ajuria, Michael, MD Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Zaman, Warda, DO Internal Medicine- Nephrology Courtesy Loeza, Joanna, MD OB/GYN- DFAM Active E. Biennial Reappointments Provider Department Staff Status Bui, Lamson, Psy.D Psychiatry/Psychology A Butler, Kimberly, MD DFAM A Castillo, Carla, MD DFAM P Faramazyan, Alina, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Feddersen, Michael, DO Psychiatry/Psychology C Harrison, Steven, MD Surgery A Howell, Tiffany, MD Pediatrics A Josephson, Scott, MD Internal Medicine C Lau, Edward, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Anna M. Roth, R.N., M.S., M.P.H. Health Services Director Samir B. Shah, M.D., F.A.C.S Chief Executive Officer Contra Costa County Regional Medical Center and Health Centers Contra Costa Health Services CONTRA COSTA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AND HEALTH CENTERS 2500 Alhambra Avenue Martinez, California 94553-3156 Ph. 925-370-5000 Credentials Committee Recommendations 2/12/2024 1 Liss, William, MD Internal Medicine A Maitra, Sarbani, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Manuchehry, Amir, MD Anesthesia P Matthys, Andrew, MD Internal Medicine P Nguyen, Minh, MD Critical Care A Pai, Vidya, MD Pediatrics C Shah, Maulik, MD Internal Medicine C Silver, Deborah, MD Psychiatry/Psychology A Tulshian, Priyanka, MD Hosptial Medicine A Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN A Wu, Katherine, MD Pediatrics C F. Biennial Renewal of Privileges-Affiliates Provider Department Staff Category Cedermaz, Heather, NP DFAM AFF Daisley, Erin, FNP DFAM AFF Humphrey, Kimberly, NP Pediatrics AFF G. Biennial Reappointments for Teleradiologists (vRad) Provider Department Reviewed By Ghani, Mazen, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller Gierbolini, Mayte, MD Diagnostic Imaging Moeller H. Additional Privileges Provider Department Reviewed By Boittin, Nathalie, MD OB/GYN DFAM Wong, Christina, MD OB/GYN DFAM I. Voluntary Resignation Provider Department Dhatt, Jagjiwan, FNP DFAM Parish, Austin, MD Emergency Medicine Suchow, David, MD DFAM Ubhayakar, Kiran, MD Internal Medicine Credentials Committee Recommendations 2/12/2024 2 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0572 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26264 to increase the hours of two Certified Nursing Assistant positions in the Health Services Department. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments:1. P300-26264, 2. Signed P300 C.109.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Increase the Hours of Two Certified Nursing Assistant Positions in the Health Services Department ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26264 to increase the hours of one (1) Certified Nursing Assistant (VTWA) position #15705 at salary plan and grade TA5-0906 ($3,664 - $4,453) and its incumbent EE#93807 from 24/40 to 32/40 (6313 - Inpatient Psychiatric Services); and increase the hours of one (1) Certified Nursing Assistant position #11202 at salary plan and grade TA5-0906 ($3,664 - $4,453) and its incumbent EE#73600 from 32/40 to 40/40 (6505 - Nursing Administration) in the Health Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this request will result in an annual increase of approximately $34,328.24 with pension costs of $5,015 already included. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) BACKGROUND: Per Teamsters Local 856 MOU, section 48 - Position Hours Adjustment, incumbents have the ability to submit requests during the months of January and/or July to have their position hours adjusted. Management reviews and evaluates these requests by considering the actual work hours of the employee over the past six (6) months and the anticipated needs of the department. The incumbent of Certified Nursing Assistant position #15705 has requested to increase their hours from 24/40 to 32/40; and the incumbent of Certified Nursing Assistant position #11202 has requested to increase their hours from 32/40 to 40/40. After reviewing each request, management has determined that both incumbents have been consistently working increased hours over the past 6 months and are in agreement with adjusting the hours of both positions as requested. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0572,Version:1 If not approved, the County will not be complying with the negotiated MOU terms previously agreed upon with the union. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0573 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/14/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26265 to increase the hours of one Registered Nurse position from Permanent-Intermittent to Permanent Part-Time in the Health Services Department. (Cost Savings, Hospital Enterprise Fund I) Attachments:1. P300-26265, 2. Signed P300 26265.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director Report Title:Increase One Registered Nurse Position from Permanent-Intermittent to Permanent Part-Time in the Health Services Department. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26265 to increase one (1) Registered Nurse (VWXG) position #8058 at salary plan and grade L32-1880 ($12,004 - $14,991) and its incumbent EE#83332 from permanent- intermittent to permanent part-time 32/40 in the Health Services Department. FISCAL IMPACT: Upon approval, this request will result in an annual cost savings of approximately $57,780.50 with pension costs of $8,441.13 already included. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I) BACKGROUND: Per California Nurses Association MOU, section 6.5 - Position Hours Adjustment, incumbents have the ability to submit requests during the months of January and/or July to have their position hours adjusted. Management reviews and evaluates these requests by considering the actual work hours of the employee over the past six (6) months and the anticipated needs of the department moving forward. After reviewing this request, the department is in agreement with adjusting position #8058 from permanent-intermittent to permanent part-time 32/40, as this change will have no negative impact to operations. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If not approved, the County will not be complying with the negotiated MOU terms previously agreed upon with the union. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0573,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0574 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26263 to add one (1) full-time Senior Buyer (represented) position and one (1) full-time Buyer II (represented) position in the Public Works Department and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE budget adjustment No. BDA-24-00018 transferring $49,084 from the general fund to fund the positions. (100% General Fund) Attachments:1. PAF - Add Purchasing positions, 2. Budget_Amendment__FY_2023-24_-_BDA-24-00018 Purchasing, 3. Signed P300 26263.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Position Adjustment to add one full-time Senior Buyer and one full-time Buyer II ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. to add one (1) full-time Senior Buyer (STTB) (represented) position at salary plan and grade ZB5 1631 ($7,510-$9,129) and one (1) full-time Buyer II (STTA) (represented) position at a salary plan and grade ZB5 1525 ($6,762-$8,219) in the Public Works Department. APPROVE budget adjustment No. BDA-24-00018 and AUTHORIZE the transfer of $49,084 from the general fund to salary and benefits to fund the positions in the Public Works Department. FISCAL IMPACT: This action will result in increased salary costs of $46,084, including $5,515 in retirement costs. BACKGROUND: The two positions are requested to address the increased procurement workload to support County departments to comply with the new Purchasing Administrative Bulletin approved by this Board on June 27,2023.The new bulletin sets purchasing policies and requirements to achieve minimum standards for the purchase of services, materials,supplies,equipment,furnishings,and other personal property for County departments.County departments are complying with the new bulletin which has resulted in an increase in formal solicitations and requests for Purchasing support. An additional Senior Buyer is requested to process more complex commodities.An additional Buyer II position is requested to assist with the increased volume of purchase orders and formal solicitations. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0574,Version:1 Purchasing is updating the Small Business Enterprise (SBE)policies into one Administrative Bulletin and plans to conduct regular outreach to small businesses.Purchasing is also tasked with developing training for county staff on various purchasing policies and procedures.Purchasing cannot provide these services without additional staff resources. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this action is not approved,the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division will not be able to provide additional purchasing support to County departments. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ View Budget Amendment: Budget Amendment: FY 2023-24 - Operating Budget on 02/08/2024 : BDA-24-00018 08:42 AM 02/08/2024 Page 1 of 2 Company Contra Costa County Budget Template Operating Budget : FY2023-24 Operating Budget Budget FY2023-24 Operating Budget Organizing Dimension Type Amendment ID BDA-24-00018 Amendment Date 02/08/2024 Description To appropriate funds from the general fund to Public Works Purchasing for the addition of two positions in FY 23-24: 1 Senior Buyer and 1 Buyer II. Staff Report scheduled for 2/27/24. Amendment Type Appropriation / Estimated Revenue Adjustment Balanced Amendment Yes Entry Type Mid-Year Adjustments Status In Progress Budget Amendment Entries Period *Ledger Account/Summary Home Organization *Cost Center *Fund Debit Amount Credit Amount Memo Exceptions FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 9990:APPROPRIATED FUND BAL 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0005 REVENUE - GENERAL COUNTY 100300 GENERAL $0.00 $46,084.00 To fund STTB and STTA from general fund. FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1015:DEFERRED COMP CTY CONTRB 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $600.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1070:WORKERS COMPENSATION INS 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $1,581.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1011:PERMANENT SALARIES 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $28,545.00 $0.00 Salaries for STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1063:UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $57.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1060:EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $7,602.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1044:RETIREMENT EXPENSE 4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $5,515.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA FY 2023-24 Year (FY2023-24 Operating Budget) 1042:F.I.C.A.4503 PW FINANCE (Home Org) 0020 PURCHASING 100300 GENERAL $2,184.00 $0.00 Costs related to STTB and STTA Process History 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0575 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and ACKNOWLEDGE that, by its terms, the purchase order with 11:11 Systems, Inc. (as successor in interest to SunGard AS), pertaining to the renewal of DoIT’s IT systems and mainframe disaster recovery services and initially approved by the Board on February 6, 2024 (Item C.92), with an amount not to exceed of $70,000, does not terminate on the date previously specified in the Board action, but instead, terminates on June 30, 2025. (100% User Departments) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Marc Shorr, Information Technology Director Report Title:Correction of Previous Board Action from February 6, 2024 (Item C.92) for Purchase Order with 11:11 Systems, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and ACKNOWLEDGE that, by its terms, the purchase order with 11:11 Systems, Inc. (as successor in interest to SunGard AS), pertaining to the renewal of DoIT’s IT systems and mainframe disaster recovery services and initially approved by the Board on February 6, 2024 (Item C.92), with an amount not to exceed of $70,000, does not terminate on the date previously specified in the Board action, but instead, terminates on June 30, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this product is included in the department’s FY 23-24 budget. 100% User Departments. BACKGROUND: 11:11 Systems, Inc. (as successor in interest to SunGard AS) provides disaster recovery services including data restoration, testing and simulation, communication and reporting as well as post-recovery evaluation, which are designed to help recover and restore DoIT’s mainframe system and data in the event of a disruptive incident such as a natural disaster, hardware failure or other unforeseen event. Disaster recovery services are crucial for ensuring business continuity and minimizing the impact of unforeseen events on IT operations. The 11:11 Systems agreement contains mutual indemnification and a Limitation of Liability which limits the total aggregate liability of 11:11 Systems,its suppliers,resellers,partners,and their respective affiliates arising from or related to this agreement to the total amounts owed or paid by the County for the relevant products during the twenty-four (24)month period immediately preceding the first occurrence of the events giving rise CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0575,Version:1 during the twenty-four (24)month period immediately preceding the first occurrence of the events giving rise to such liability. 11:11 Systems, Inc. was chosen due to their current operational readiness and familiarity with DoIT’s mainframe system as well as their ability to restore DoIT’s mainframe and midrange systems in the event of a disruptive event or natural disaster. DoIT reviewed three informal bids; other vendors such as Baer Consulting Incorporated (BCI) and BMC Mainframe Services were evaluated and rejected because they did not provide the remote services that DoIT requested or mainframe restoration services that were not tied to managed services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If 11:11 Systems disaster recovery services are not extended DoIT will not have the ability to restore data in the event of a disaster or other unforeseen event. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0576 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $5,000 from East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, for Rodeo Library services, pursuant to the local refinery Good Neighbor Agreement, for the period July 1 through December 31, 2024. (No County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Apply for and Accept East Bay Community Foundation Grant Funds Administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council in the amount of $5,000 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Librarian,or designee,to apply for and accept a grant in the amount of $5,000 from East Bay Community Foundation,administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council,for Rodeo Library services,pursuant to the local refinery Good Neighbor Agreement for the period July 1 through December 31, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: No County match. BACKGROUND: The County currently funds 18 hours of library service at the Rodeo Library. If granted, the $5,000 from The East Bay Community Foundation, administered by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council, will be used to fund additional hours of library service. The proposed additional hours will provide one extra hour of Saturday service, and five extra hours of service during the week. These extended hours offer Rodeo residents additional opportunities to make use of the educational and recreational resources available at the library. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the grant proposal is not approved, the Rodeo Library will remain open for the County funded 18 hours per week, instead of the proposed 24 hours per week. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0577 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Niche Academy, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for the renewal of a Niche Academy Online Learning Platforms subscription, for the period April 2, 2024 through April 2, 2025. (100% Library Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Purchase Order for renewal of Niche Academy Online Learning Platforms subscription through April 2, 2025 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order including modified indemnification language with Niche Academy, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for the renewal of Niche Academy Online Learning Platforms subscription, for the period April 2, 2024 through April 2, 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Library Fund. BACKGROUND: The Library Department has used and continues to use Niche Academy,LLC,for its Online Learning Platform subscription.Niche Academy Online Learning Platform is a library-oriented learning management system that provides patrons and staff with tutorials that inform and educate them about library resources and how to use them.The system integrates with the public website to easily provide access to resource help that is relevant to Library patrons. The Terms and Conditions of the purchase order include an indemnification provision, approved by County Counsel. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library patrons will not have access to a learning platform that assists in how to use library resources. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0577,Version:2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:224-0578 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Baker & Taylor, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $46,720 for renewal of the PressReader, a digital, translatable magazine and newspaper, for the period December 1, 2023 through November 30, 2024. (100% Library Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 2 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Purchase Order with Baker & Taylor, LLC for renewal of PressReader through November 30, 2024 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order including modified limitation of liability with Baker & Taylor, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $46,720 for renewal of the PressReader, for the period December 1, 2023 through November 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Library Fund. BACKGROUND: The Library Department has used and continues to use Baker &Taylor,LLC for PressReader.PressReader is a digital magazine and newspaper offered to Library patrons and sold by Baker &Taylor,LLC.The product provides access to over 7,000 titles from around the world and every newspaper and magazine on the platform can be translated instantly into one of eighteen languages,or the built- in reader can be used to hear the paper aloud.The digital content on the platform is available to users on the same day as the printed addition. The Terms and Conditions of the purchase order include a limitation of liability provision, approved by County Counsel. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library’s patrons will lose access to PressReader’s products. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0578,Version:2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0579 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/9/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Califa Group in an amount not to exceed $13,594 for the renewal of the Skillsoft 2.0 and IT Pro Books subscription, for the period December 31, 2023 through December 30, 2024. (100% Library Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Alison McKee, County Librarian Report Title:Purchase order with Califa Group for renewal of Skillsoft Expert 2.0 and IT Pro Books subscription through December 30, 2024 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order including modified limitation of liability with Califa Group in an amount not to exceed $13,593.70 for the renewal of Skillsoft Expert 2.0 and IT Pro Books subscription, for the period December 31, 2023 through December 30, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: 100 % Library Fund BACKGROUND: The Library Department has and continues to use Califa Group,a nonprofit library membership consortium,that brokers and facilitates the procurement of library products and manages master contracts and pricing agreements with its vendors.The Contra Costa County Library has a membership with Califa Group granting access to these services.Skillsoft’s Skillsoft Expert 2.0 and IT Pro Books is one of the discounted subscriptions offered by Califa Group to its members.Skillsoft offers patrons a vast digital library with e-Book titles from hundreds of publishers,as well as IT,productivity,and collaboration e-courses.The videos feature an array of desktop and IT topics and are downloadable as MP4 and are 508-compliant for users with disabilities. The Terms and Conditions of the purchase order include limitation of liability provisions, approved by County Counsel. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library’s patrons will not have access to the services provided by this subscription. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0580 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with Strategies for Youth in an amount not to exceed $590,000 to provide the Policing the Teen Brain training program for interested law enforcement agencies in the County for the period October 1, 2023, through September 30, 2027. (100% Federal) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Esa Ehmen-Krause, County Probation Officer Report Title:Rescind Prior Board Action Pertaining to Contracted Services with Strategies for Youth ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RESCIND Board action on February 6, 2024 (C.100) regarding a contract agreement with Strategies for Youth, and APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with Strategies for Youth in an amount not to exceed $590,000 to provide the Policing the Teen Brain training program for interested law enforcement agencies in the County for the period of October 1, 2023, through September 30, 2027. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no change in the contract funding or amount. This contract will still be 100% funded through a grant awarded in 2023 from the Federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. BACKGROUND: The Probation Department is the recipient of a federal Community Project Funding award for the Strategies for Supporting Youth in the Community Initiative. Probation’s Office of Reentry & Justice (ORJ) is the administrator of this Initiative and is contracting with Strategies for Youth to provide evidence-based training sessions on adolescent development to all interested law enforcement agencies in the County. Under this contract, Strategies for Youth will provide a 4-day Train-the-Trainer course with a customized training curriculum; and support the delivery of a 2-day Patrol Officer training course provided by newly CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0580,Version:1 trained officers at participating law enforcement agencies. This approach allows for specialized training to be available after the contract expires. The purpose of this Board Order is to correct the term to read October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2027 to match the contract term as agreed by the County and the contractor, and to match the grant award. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this correction is not approved, the Board Order would not reflect the correct contract term for the provision of services with Strategies for Youth under the grant awarded to Probation. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0581 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Probation Department, a purchase order with Clear Impact, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $25,000 to procure a subscription service for local community corrections community programs performance reporting for the period September 6, 2023 through September 6, 2024. (100% State) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Esa Ehmen-Krause, County Probation Officer Report Title:Purchase Order with Clear Impact, Inc. for Performance Reporting Software for the AB109 Community Programs ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the Probation Department, to execute a Purchase Order containing modified indemnification with Clear Impact, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $25,000 for the purchase of a subscription service for performance reporting by the AB109 Community Programs for the period from September 6, 2023 through September 6, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% of the cost is covered by AB109 Planning and Implementation funding. BACKGROUND: The Probation Department, including the Office of Reentry and Justice, has moved towards a data driven decision making approach where evidence-based programming and monitoring will be conducted by both the Office of Reentry and Justice’s program staff, and Probation’s fiscal staff. The AB109 Community Providers report on the measures outlined in the program logic model, included in the performance contracts. The data entry component of the Clear Impact software is customizable to each specific programs metrics and performance indicators that are to be monitored and evaluated. This software will efficiently allow for multiple users to access the data related to a unique program and to quickly assess outcomes over time. The system surveys the programs and summarizes the responses. This work is currently done by both program and Probation staff entering information into Excel spreadsheets. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0581,Version:1 Under the terms of the Subscription Agreement the County is obligated to indemnify Clear Impact against third party claims based on unauthorized or illegal use of the service. In addition, Clear Impact’s liability is limited to the lesser of Five Thousand dollars or the amount paid by the County in the prior twelve months. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If unapproved,the Probation Department and AB109 Community Partners would not have an automated,user friendly, system that allows the monitoring and reporting of contract performance measures. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0582 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract with UKG Kronos Systems LLC, in an amount not to exceed $40,893 for timekeeping software and support services for the period December 20, 2023 through December 19, 2024. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Esa Ehmen-Krause, County Probation Officer Report Title:UKG Kronos Systems LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Probation Officer, or designee, to execute a contract containing modified indemnification with UKG Kronos Systems LLC, in an amount not to exceed $40,893 for timekeeping software and support services for the period December 20, 2023 through December 19, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: This total of $40,893 will be 100% funded by the General Fund. BACKGROUND: UKG Kronos Systems LLC provides automated timekeeping services to improve the efficiency of scheduling. This software sends out a notification to eligible staff when open shifts are available, and the timekeeping software can generate a payroll report to provide accurate information regarding regular and overtime pay. In the past, management did manual calling, clipboards, and handwritten notes. Probation currently has a contract with UKG Kronos LLC and is seeking to renew the contract. Under the Master Services Agreement, there are limitations of liability. During any twelve (12) month of the contract term, UKG’s total aggregate liability for any and all claims in connection with any service shall in no event exceed the amount paid or payable by customer to UKG during such twelve (12) month contract term for the service giving rise to such claim(s). Probation is seeking acceptance of this modified indemnification language as well to be able to utilize the Master Services Agreement. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If unapproved Probation would not have automated timekeeping software and support for Juvenile Hall staff. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0582,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0583 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute a contract with Thomson Reuters West in an amount not to exceed $291,330 to provide print and online legal research and reference materials for the period of March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2029. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Ellen McDonnell, Public Defender Report Title:Contract - Thomson Reuters West ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Defender, or designee, to execute a contract with Thomson Reuters West in an amount not to exceed $291,330 to provide online legal research and reference materials for the period of March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2029. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% General Funds. The total cost is not to exceed $291,330 over the following years: FY 23/24: $18,660 FY 24/25: $55,981 FY 25/26: $57,101 FY 26/27: $58,243 FY 27/28: $59,407 FY 28/29: $41,938 BACKGROUND: Thomson Reuters West provides online subscription services to the Thomson West Proflex Online Law Library and provides access to various printed legal publications. These reference and research tools are essential components of effective legal representation. Thomson Reuters West offers its products to governmental agencies at a 55% discount from the vendor’s standard pricing. Agreement to a five-year service contract term further reduces the cost in that the annual increase, typically five percent (5%) will instead be capped at two percent (2%). The contract contains a CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0583,Version:1 provision limiting liability. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the contract is not approved, the Public Defender’s Office will be unable to access essential printed and online legal research and reference materials and will need to procure these resources at a higher cost. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0584 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/26/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Public Defender, a purchase order amendment with Caltronics Business Systems to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $315,000 for copier rentals and managed print services and to extend the term date through February 24, 2026. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Ellen McDonnell, Public Defender Report Title:Amendment to Purchase Order #020747 with Caltronics Business Systems ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Public Defender, a blanket purchase order (#020747) amendment with Caltronics Business Systems to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $315,000 and to extend the term end date from February 24, 2024 to February 24, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request would result in up to $100,000 in contractual expenditures over a two-year period, which would be fully funded by the department’s general fund allocation. The purchase order payment conditions include a monthly copier rental fee and established rates per sheet printed. BACKGROUND: Caltronics Business Systems provides copiers and copier services for the Public Defenders offices located at 800 Ferry St. Martinez, 627 Ferry St. Martinez, and 3811 Bissell Ave. Richmond. The request to extend the original term by two years is more cost effective than executing an annual amendment. Additionally, the extended term end date aligns with the term of the department’s other copier leases. Future copier services will be integrated into one purchase order to facilitate contract monitoring and usage. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0584,Version:1 If this amendment is not approved, the Department will not have access to copier rental and managed print services needed for its operations. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0585 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/4/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Nicolaos Theophanous (dba Theophanous Structural Engineers), to extend the term through December 31, 2024 with no change to the payment limit, to provide on-call structural services for various County facilities projects, Countywide. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve and Authorize Amendment No. 2 to Consulting Services Agreement with Nicolaos Theophanous d/b/a Theophanous Structural Engineers. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Nicolaos Theophanous (d/b/a Theophanous Structural Engineers) (Theophanous) effective February 27, 2024, to extend the term from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024, with no change to the payment limit to provide on-call structural engineering services for various County facilities projects, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact. BACKGROUND: On January 1, 2020 the Board of Supervisors approved a Contract with Theophanous in the amount of $195,000. On September 21, 2021 Amendment No. 1 was approved by the Board of Supervisors to increase the pay limit by $205,000 and to extend the term 1 year. Theophanous is currently engaged in ongoing projects for the County such as the Surgical Lights project and the Lab Automation project, both for the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center. Theophanous is familiar with these active projects and is skilled at providing structural engineering services of the type that has often been of valuable service to the County. Therefore, it is recommended that this contract amendment be awarded at this time. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0585,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If Amendment No. 2 is not approved, active projects that Theophanous is involved with may suffer delays and increased costs and other currently unforeseen consequences resulting from the engineer of record no longer being involved with these active projects. Additionally, the County would lose the option of engaging Theophanous through the existing on-call contract to provide services on new projects of the type that Theophanous has frequently provided to the County in the past. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0586 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with PreScience Corporation, effective December 31, 2023, to increase the payment limit by $100,000 to a new payment limit of $1,727,747 for construction management services for the Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement Project, and to extend the term from December 31, 2023 to December 31, 2024, Concord area. (89% Federal Highway Bridge Program Funds, 11% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Amendment to Consulting Services Agreement with PreScience Corporation, Concord area ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a Consulting Services Agreement (contract)amendment with PreScience Corporation,effective December 31st,2023,to increase the payment limit by $100,000.00 to a new payment limit of $1,727,747.28 for construction management services for the Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement Project,and to extend the term from December 31,2023 to December 31,2024,Concord area.(County Project No.:0662-6R4119)(Federal Project No.:BRLS-5928 (128))(District IV and V) FISCAL IMPACT: This project,including this Consulting Services Agreement,will be funded by 88.53%Federal Highway Bridge Program Funds and 11.47% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: The Project consists of removing the existing bridge on Marsh Drive over Walnut Creek (State Bridge No.28C- 0442),which is seismically,structurally,and hydraulically deficient,and construct a new concrete bridge in stages to current standard,reconstructing the roadway approaches from both ends of the bridge,constructing a new separated walking path on the south side of the bridge that will connect to the existing Iron Horse Trail, and incorporating drainage improvements,utility work,erosion control work,and roadway signing and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0586,Version:1 striping. PreScience was selected to provide construction management services for the Project after completing a request for proposal solicitation and technical proposal process.Construction management services for the Project includes full time inspection,quality assurance materials testing,quality assurance surveying,extensive coordination with project stakeholders including Caltrans,Contra Costa Water District,City of Concord,and the East Bay Regional Park District,and in-field decision making to ensure the Project is built per plans and specifications and meets County,City,and Caltrans Standards.Construction management services also include recording daily activity and equipment on-site and maintaining required project documentation.Public Works has successfully negotiated with PreScience to provide construction management services. On March 30,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved an initial contract with PreScience Corporation in the amount of $1,581,016.64 for construction management services for the Public Works Department.Although in- field construction is complete,project closeout activities remain and are taking longer than originally anticipated.This Amendment No.3 increases the payment limit and extends the contract term which is necessary for continuation of construction management services. Government Code Section 31000 and 4525 authorizes the County to contract for services including the type of construction management that PreScience Corporation provides. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without Board of Supervisors’approval,this Consulting Services Agreement will not be in effect.A delay in the completion of the Project will occur.Project delay may also result in substantial additional project costs and jeopardize the funding. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0587 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a lease with Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (dba Kids at Work) to lease approximately 2,603 square feet in a County-owned building located at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, as requested by the Public Works Department, for a 10-year term beginning February 1, 2024, in exchange for rent in the amount of $800 per month and the continued operation of a childcare facility. (100% General Fund) Attachments:1. Kids At Work Lease - FInal Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE a Lease of County-owned Property to Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (dba Kids at Work). ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a lease with Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (dba Kids at Work)to lease approximately 2,603 square feet in a County- owned building located at 255 Glacier Drive,Martinez,as requested by the Public Works Department,for a 10- year term beginning February 1,2024,in exchange for rent in the amount of $800 per month and the continued operation of a childcare facility for the children of County employees. FISCAL IMPACT: Rent and occupancy costs are budgeted within the General Fund, Fund#100300. There is no negative impact on the General Fund. The lease permits the County to receive rent from this property . BACKGROUND: Kids At Work Early Childhood Center is a non-profit corporation that provides low-cost quality childcare for any Contra Costa County employee,as well as other public sector employees within the county,provided space is available,in the County-owned building located at 255 Glacier Drive in Martinez,known as the Public Works Department campus, for more than 20 years. Kids At Work provides infant care (less than 1-year old),toddler care (ages 1 year to 3.5 years)and Pre-school CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0587,Version:1 Kids At Work provides infant care (less than 1-year old),toddler care (ages 1 year to 3.5 years)and Pre-school (pre-kindergarten)care and teaching for children.Each phase of the Kids At Work curriculum is designed to provide a caring and teaching environment for the children of county employees,preparing them for kindergarten and beyond.Kids At Work meets and exceeds all applicable licensing regulations and standards. These standards relate to the County’s facilities,staff,health and safety procedures,nutrition,teacher/child ratios,and recordkeeping.The school is subject to inspection by the state,county,city,health,fire,and licensing officials.Therefore,county employees know their children are being cared for and educated within an environment that can provide them with peace of mind and confidence so they can continue to serve the residents of Contra Costa County. Providing this Childcare Care space on the Public Works campus has proven to be not only an investment in our children, but also a benefit to all County employees by providing this option. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the lease is not approved, the operation of the childcare facility at this location will be in jeopardy. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/4/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 LEASE Kids At Work 255 Glacier Dr. Building 500 Martinez, California This lease is dated February 1, 2024, and is between the County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California (“County”), and Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center (DBA Kids At Work), a California nonprofit corporation (“Lessee”). Recitals A. The County owns the property located at 255 Glacier Drive in Martinez, California (the “Property”). The Property is improved with two buildings, the main building, which is the building shown on Exhibit A with a reddish tan roof, and a building known as “Building 500.” Building 500 consists of approximately 11,921 square feet and is the building shown on Exhibit A with the blue roof. Both buildings are used by the County’s Public Works Department. B. The County desires to lease to Lessee that portion of Building 500 consisting of approximately 2,603 square feet that is outlined in red on Exhibit A (the “Premises”). C. The County and Lessee desire that the Premises be used for as a childcare facility for the children of County employees. The parties therefore agree as follows: Agreement 1. Lease of Premises. Subject to the terms set forth in this lease, the County hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from the County, the Premises. 2. Term. The “Term” of this lease is 10 years, commencing February 1, 2024, and continuing through January 31, 2034. 3. Consideration. As consideration for this lease, Lessee shall (i) pay monthly rent in the amount of $800 on or before the first day of each month, and (ii) use the Premises to operate a childcare facility for children of County employees. a. Rent for any partial month will be prorated at the rate of 1/30th of the applicable monthly rent per day. b. The childcare facility is to be operated between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on days that County offices are closed. 2 4. Additional Payment Terms. a. Late Rental Payments: In the event Lessee fails to pay County any amount due under this lease within five days after such amount is due, Lessee shall pay to County a late charge of $100 per occurrence (the “Late Charge”), plus interest on the unpaid balance at a rate of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month, from the date the pay- ment was due and payable until paid in full. Lessee shall pay all Late Charges as additional rent on or before the date the next installment of rent is due. County and Lessee hereby agree that it is and will be extremely difficult to ascertain and fix County’s actual damage from any late payments and, thus, that Lessee shall pay as liquidated damages to County the Late Charge specified in this Section, which is the result of the parties’ reasonable endeavor to estimate fair average compensation for the late payment (other than attorneys’ fees and costs). County’s acceptance of the Late Charge as liquidated damages does not constitute a waiver of Lessee’s default with respect to the overdue amount or prevent County from exercising any of the rights and remedies available to County under this lease. b. Form and Place of Payment: Lessee shall pay all rents and fees in cash or by personal check, certified check, or money order, payable to the County of Contra Costa, by delivering same on or before due date to Contra Costa County, Public Works Department – Real Estate Division, 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, California 94553, or at such other place as the County may designate from time to time. c. Returned Checks: If a check written by Lessee is returned for insufficient funds, the County may impose a reasonable service charge in addition to any Late Charge and in addition to any charges imposed by the bank. County may require Lessee to pay rent by certified check or money order if Lessee’s bank or banks have returned one or more personal checks within the preceding 12-month period. 5. Use. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Premises may be used by Lessee only for the purpose of providing childcare services to the children of County employees. Lessee may not use the Premises for any other purpose without the prior written consent of the County. Any use of the Premises other than as described in this Section without the County’s prior written consent is a default of this lease. 6. Obligation to Pay Utilities/Services. a. The County shall contract and pay utility providers directly for all utilities used or consumed on the Premises, including, but not limited to gas, water, electricity, storm and sanitary sewer services, landscaping, telephone services, and garbage disposal. b. Lessee shall pay for any services necessary to provide the services intended, including but not limited to telephone, custodial/janitorial services, hazardous materials disposal, and linen services provided to the Premises. 3 7. Condition of Premises. Lessee is leasing the Premises in an “as is” physical condition with no warranty, express or implied, on the part of the County as to the condition of the Premises. 8. Maintenance and Repairs. a. Roof and Exterior of Premises. County shall keep the roof and exterior of the Premises in good order, condition, and repair, and shall maintain the structural integrity of the Building, including the exterior doors and their fixtures, closers and hinges, exterior windows, glass and glazing, and all locks and key systems used in the Premises. b. Interior of Premises. Lessee shall keep and maintain the interior of the Premises in good order, condition and repair, but County shall repair damage to the interior caused by its failure to maintain the exterior in good repair, including damage to the interior caused by roof leaks and/or interior and exterior wall leaks. Lessee may install and maintain an alarm system, if deemed necessary by Lessee. c. Utility Systems. County shall repair and maintain the electrical, lighting, water and plumbing systems in good order, condition, and repair. d. HVAC. County shall maintain and repair the heating, ventilating, and air- conditioning (HVAC) systems. e. Parking; Exterior Lighting; Landscaping. County shall maintain the parking lot, exterior lighting system, and landscaping in good order, condition, and repair. f. Life Safety. County shall maintain, in compliance with government codes and standards, the fire life safety system. When needed, County shall repair and/or replace such systems. g. Covenant against Liens. Lessee may not permit any mechanic’s, materialman’s, or other lien against the Premises, or the property of which the Premises forms a part, in connection with any labor, materials, or services furnished or claimed to have been furnished. If any such lien is filed against the Premises, or property of which the Premises forms a part, Lessee will cause the same to be discharged, provided however, Lessee may contest any such lien, so long as the enforcement thereof is stayed. 9. Taxes. Lessee agrees to pay before delinquency all taxes (including, but not limited to, possessory interest tax), assessments, license fees, and other charges that are levied and assessed upon Lessee’s interest in the Premises, or upon Lessee’s personal property installed or located in or on the Premises, by Contra Costa County or other legally authorized government authority. Lessee may pay any taxes and assessments under protest, without liability, cost or expense to the Lessor, to contest the amount in good faith. 4 Payment of taxes, assessments, license fees, or other charges levied and assessed upon Lessee’s interest, (i) does not reduce the rent due to the County under this lease, and (ii) is the liability of Lessee. 10. Quiet Enjoyment. Provided Lessee complies with the terms of this lease, the County covenants that Lessee will peaceably and quietly have, hold, and enjoy the Premises during the Term. 11. Assignment and Sublease. Lessee may not assign this lease or sublease the Premises or any part thereof at any time during the Term. 12. Alterations and Additions. Lessee may not make any alterations, erect any additional structures, or make any improvements on the Premises without the prior written consent of the Director of Public Works or his or her designee. In the event Lessee makes alterations or constructs additions that violate the conditions contained in this lease (an “Unauthorized Addition”), at the County’s sole discretion, Lessee shall remove any Unauthorized Addition at Lessee’s sole cost and expense. If Lessee is required to remove any Unauthorized Addition, Lessee, at its sole cost and expense, shall restore the Premises to the conditions existing immediately prior to the existence of the Unauthorized Addition, or such other condition designated by the County in its election. If Lessee is not required to remove any Unauthorized Addition, such Unauthorized Additions shall remain on and be surrendered with the Premises on expiration or termination of this lease. If Lessee wishes to make any alterations, erect any additional structures, or make any additional improvements to the Premises as provided in this Section, Lessee may not commence construction until Lessee has the prior written consent of the County. In addition, a Notice of Lessor Non-Responsibility must be posted and recorded by Lessee during construction in accordance with Civil Code section 8444. Lessee shall mail a copy of the Notice of Lessor Non-Responsibility to Lessor upon filing it with the County Recorder. 13. Insurance. a. Liability Insurance. Throughout the Term, Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect, at its sole expense, a comprehensive general liability or commercial general liability insurance program covering bodily injury (including death), personal injury, and property damage. The limits must be not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate. The policy must name the County, its officers, agents and employees, individually and collectively, as additional insureds. The liability insurance maintained by Lessee must be primary. b. Property Insurance. The County will maintain property insurance coverage on its real property. Lessee has no interest in the proceeds of insurance on the County’s real property, improvements, equipment, or fixtures. Lessee shall sign all documents 5 necessary or proper in connection with the settlement of any claim or loss by the County. Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect, at its sole expense, a standard All Risk policy, which may exclude earthquake and flood, to insure its own personal property, contents, improvements and betterments within or on the Premises. The coverage must be for not less than 90% of the actual cash value of the personal property. Lessee shall name the County as an additional insured and loss payee with respect to the improvements and betterments. c. Worker’s Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance. Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect, at its sole expense, (i) statutory California Workers’ Compensation coverage including a broad form all-states endorsement, and (ii) employer’s liability coverage for not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for all employees engaged in services or operations at the Premises. d. Evidence of Insurance. Within 30 days of execution of this lease, Lessee shall provide to the County, on a form approved by the County, an original copy of a certificate of insurance. The certificate of insurance must certify that the coverage required by this lease has been obtained and remains in force for the period required by this lease. e. Notice of Cancellation or Reduction of Coverage. Lessee shall cause all policies it is required to obtain under the terms of this lease to contain a provision that the County is to receive written notification of any cancellation or reduction in coverage at least 30 days prior to the effective date of such cancellation or reduction. Any such notification is to be sent to the County in accordance with Section 22 - Notices. f. Waiver of Subrogation. Except as may be specifically provided elsewhere in this lease, the County and Lessee hereby each mutually waive any and all rights of recovery from the other in the event of damage to the Premises or any personal property that is caused by acts of God, perils of fire, lightning, and the extended coverage perils, as defined in insurance policies and forms approved for use in the State of California. Each party shall obtain any special endorsements, if required by their insurer, to evidence compliance with this waiver. 14. Surrender of Premises. On the last day of the Term, or sooner termination of this lease, Lessee shall peaceably and quietly leave and surrender to the County the Premises, along with their appurtenances and fixtures, all in good condition, ordinary wear and tear, damage by casualty, acts of God and circumstances over which Lessee has no control excepted. 15. Abandonment. Lessee may not vacate or abandon the Premises at any time during the Term. If Lessee abandons, vacates, or surrenders the Premises, or is dispossessed by process of law, or otherwise, the County may deem any personal property belonging to Lessee that remains on the Premises to be abandoned. 6 16. Waste, Nuisance. Lessee may not commit, or suffer to be committed, any waste upon the Premises, or any nuisance or other act or thing that may disturb the quiet enjoyment of any other occupant of the neighborhood in which the Premises is located. 17. Inspection. The County may enter the Premises at any time in an emergency and with 24 hours prior notice in a non-emergency to determine that (i) the Premises is being reasonably cared for, (ii) no waste is being made and that all actions affecting the Premises are done in the manner best calculated to preserve the Premises, and (iii) Lessee is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this lease. 18. Destruction. If damage occurs that causes a partial destruction of the Premises during the Term from any cause, the County may, at its option, make repairs within a reasonable time. Partial destruction does not void this lease, except that Lessee is entitled to a proportionate reduction in rent while such repairs are being made. The proportionate reduction in rent is to be calculated by multiplying rent by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of square feet that are unusable by Lessee and the denominator of which is the total number of square feet in the Premises. If the County does not elect to make repairs, this lease may be terminated by either party, without cost, obligation or liability to the other party, except as described herein. This lease will terminate in the event of a total destruction of the Premises. 19. Indemnification. Lessee shall indemnify, defend and hold County, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all claims, costs and liability, for any damage, injury or death, including without limitation, all consequential damages from any cause whatsoever, to any person or the property of any person arising directly or indirectly from or connected with this lease, Lessee’s operations, or Lessee’s use or possession of the Premises, save and except claims or litigation arising through the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of County, its officers or employees, and shall make good to and reimburse County for any expenditures, including reasonable attorneys fees, County may make by reason of such matters. 20. Default. The occurrence of any of the following events is a default under this lease: a. Lessee. i. Lessee’s failure to pay rent within five business days after the due date. ii. Lessee’s failure to comply with any other material term or provision of this lease if such failure is not remedied within 30 days after receipt of a written notice from the County to Lessee specifying the nature of the breach in reasonably sufficient detail (a “Notice of Default”). If the required cure of the noticed failure cannot be completed within 30 days, the failure to cure will 7 not be deemed to be a default of this lease if Lessee has attempted to cure the failure within the 30-day period and has diligently and continuously attempted to complete the cure as soon as reasonably possible. In no event will the cure period extend beyond the 60-day period after Lessee’s receipt of the Notice of Default. b. The County. The County’s failure to perform any obligation under this lease if the failure is not remedied within 30 days after receipt of a written notice from Lessee to the County specifying the nature of the breach in reasonably sufficient detail. If the required cure of the noticed failure cannot reasonably be completed within 30 days, a default will not be deemed to occur if the County has attempted to cure the failure within the 30-day period and has diligently and continuously attempted to complete the cure as soon as reasonably possible. 21. Remedies. a. County. Upon the occurrence of a default by Lessee, the County may reenter and repossess the Premises and remove all persons and property from the Premises, after giving Lessee written Notice of Default and in accordance with due process of law. b. Lessee. Upon the occurrence of a default by the County, Lessee may (i) terminate this lease by giving written notice to the County and quit the Premises without further cost or obligation to the County. 22. Notices. Any notice required or permitted under this lease shall be in writing and sent by overnight delivery service or registered or certified mail, postage prepaid and directed as follows: To Lessee: Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood Center Attn: School Director 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 To County: Contra Costa County Public Works Department Attn: Principal Real Property Agent 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 Either party may at any time designate in writing a substitute address for that set forth above and thereafter notices are to be directed to the substituted address. If sent in accordance with this Section, all notices will be deemed effective (i) the next business day, if sent by overnight courier, or (ii) three days after being deposited in the United States Postal system. 8 23. Successors and Assigns. This lease binds and inures to the benefit of the heirs, successors, and assigns of the County and Lessee. 24. Holding Over. In the event Lessee remains in possession of the Premises after the expiration of the Term, such holding over does not constitute a renewal or extension of this lease, but will be construed to be a tenancy from month to month on the same terms and conditions set forth in this lease, except that the monthly rent due and payable hereunder will be 125% of the rent payable as of the last month of the Term. 25. Time is of the Essence. In fulfilling all terms and conditions of this lease, time is of the essence. 26. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California govern all matters arising out of this lease. 27. Severability. In the event that any provision in this lease is held to be invalid or unenforceable in any respect, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this lease will not in any way be affected or impaired. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] 9 28. Entire Agreement; Construction; Modification. Neither party has relied on any promise or representation not contained in this lease. All previous conversations, negotiations, and understandings are of no further force or effect. This lease is not to be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the parties, but rather as if both parties prepared it. This lease may be modified only by a writing signed by both parties. The parties are executing this lease on the date set forth in the introductory paragraph. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, a Contra Costa Public Works Early Childhood political subdivision of the State of Center, a California nonprofit corporation California By: _______________________ By: _______________________ Warren Lai Tamra Melgoza Director of Public Works Chief Executive Officer By: _______________________ Carolyn Halstenson Secretary RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By: _______________________ Jessica L. Dillingham Principal Real Property Agent By: _________________________ Julin E. Perez Supervising Real Property Agent APPROVED AS TO FORM THOMAS L. GEIGER, COUNTY COUNSEL By: _______________________ Kathleen M. Andrus Deputy County Counsel WLP487 \\PW-DATA\grpdata\realprop\LEASE MANAGEMENT\MARTINEZ\255 GLACIER DR (MULTI BLDGS) - T00038\500 GLACIER DR - Kids At Work\Kids At Work Lease - final.doc 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0588 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with DRT Grading & Paving, Inc., to extend the term through January 31, 2025, with no change to the payment limit or remaining terms, for on-call pavement maintenance and repair services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. (No Fiscal Impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Amendment No. 1 with DRT Grading & Paving Inc. a California Corporation, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute Contract Amendment with DRT Grading &Paving,Inc.,effective January 31,2024,to extend the term from January 31,2024 to January 31,2025,with no change to the payment limit,for on-call pavement maintenance and repair services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: Facilities Maintenance Budget. (100% General Fund) BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department,Facilities Services is responsible for maintenance and repairs of all County properties.Work done under this contract consists of paving and concrete work to County properties in support of facilities maintenance.Work may include pavement repairs and replacement,skin patching, sidewalk repairs, concrete flatwork, and hot mix asphalt paving. Originally bid on BidSync #2009-423,DRT Grading &Paving,Inc.,was one of three lowest,responsive,and responsible vendors awarded for this work.On January 5,2021,the Board approved a contract with DRT Grading & Paving, Inc. in the amount of $750,000 with the term February 1, 2021 through January 31, 2024. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0588,Version:1 Government Code Section 25358 authorizes the County to contract for maintenance and upkeep of County facilities. Facilities Services is requesting Amendment No.1 to be approved extending the term from January 31,2024 to January 31, 2025 for on-call pavement maintenance and repair services. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Without the approval of this Contract Amendment No. 1, pavement maintenance and repair services with DRT Grading &Paving,Inc.will discontinue and current projects underway will not be completed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0592 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Bay Point and Saranap areas. (100% State Department of Transportation Grant Funds) Attachments:1. CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and take related actions under CEQA ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project (Project)and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise the Project,Bay Point and Saranap areas.[County Project No. WO7079, DCD-CP#23-37] (Districts V, II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 2(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $2,100,000. 100% State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Grant Funds. BACKGROUND: The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0),which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025.The project will install two subsurface trash capture devices,certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),one in Bay Point and one in Saranap,which will help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0592,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project may result in a delay of design,construction,funding,and compliance with the SWRCB mandate. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0590 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/1/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to submit three grant applications to the US Department of Transportation Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity grant program for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 for the Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Project, Boulevard Way Complete Streets Study, and Bay Point Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Study, Saranap and Bay Point areas. (80% Federal Funds and 20% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Grant applications for the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) grant program for Fiscal Year 2023/2024, Saranap and Bay Point areas. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit three grant applications to the United States Department of Transportation (DOT)Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE)grant program for Fiscal Year 2023/2024 for the Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Project,Boulevard Way Complete Streets Study,and Bay Point Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Study, Saranap and Bay Point areas. (Districts II and V) FISCAL IMPACT: 80% Federal Funds and 20% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: On November 30,2023,the DOT issued the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)for the RAISE grant program under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (also referred to as the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law”or “BIL”).In the notice,the DOT solicits applications for surface transportation projects that will have a significant local or regional impact that advance safety,equity,climate and sustainability,workforce development, job quality, and wealth creation. Applications must be submitted by February 28, 2024. The DOT has authorized and appropriated $1.5 billion to be awarded annually as part of the RAISE program. The grant program categorizes applications as either:(a)planning grants for pre-construction activities;or (b) capital grants for projects that include construction activities.The County intends to apply for three planning CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0590,Version:1 grants, the allowable maximum, for this cycle of the RAISE program. The DOT will evaluate applications based on eight merit criteria:(1)safety;(2)environmental sustainability; (3)quality of life;(4)mobility and community connectivity;(5)economic competitiveness and opportunity;(6) state of good repair; (7) partnership and collaboration; and (8) innovation. RECOMMENDED CANDIDATE PROJECTS: Public Works staff recommends submitting grant applications for the following projects summarized below: 1.Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Project (District 2) This project is to complete further design of improvements proposed in the 2015 Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study.The scope of the design work is Olympic Boulevard from Interstate 680 to Pleasant Hill Road and improvements include new and widened sidewalks plus Class II bikeways. 2.Boulevard Way Complete Streets Study (District 2) This project will evaluate the feasibility of implementing a road diet on Boulevard Way from Interstate 680 to Saranap Avenue and constructing a pedestrian path from Kinney Drive to Olympic Boulevard. The feasibility study will focus on safety and traffic calming measures as well as active transportation enhancements and will include public outreach to support the design of future improvements. 3.Bay Point Enhanced Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Study (District 5) This project will evaluate the feasibility of implementing enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including Class IV bicycle facilities and green infrastructure,in Bay Point,specifically on:1)McAvoy Road,starting at McAvoy Harbor and the Bay Point Regional Shoreline,across railroad tracks to Port Chicago Highway,2)along Port Chicago Highway to Willow Pass Road,and 3)Willow Pass Road from the Evora Road-westbound State Route 4 ramps intersection to the border with the City of Pittsburg. If authorized to proceed,staff will finalize and submit the grant applications for both projects by February 28, 2024. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Public Works Department is not authorized to submit the application,grant funding will not be available, which will delay the design and construction of these projects. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0591 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE correction to the Board’s January 9, 2024 approval (Item C.113) of a job order contract with The Gordian Group, Inc., (dba The Mellon Group), to correct contract provisions related to the consultant’s licensed software, and to refer to the correct contract term from March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2027, with an optional extension through February 28, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director. (100% Various Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Clarify Staff Report # 24-0114 with The Gordian Group, Inc. for Job Order Contracting Program Development and Implementation Services ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE clarification of Board action of January 9, 2024 with The Gordian Group, Inc., dba The Mellon Group (Gordian), to correct contract provisions related to Consultant’s license agreement and to modify the approved contract term from the period from January 9, 2024 through January 8, 2027, which may be extended to January 8, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director to the period from March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2027, which may be extended to February 28, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no upfront costs to develop the job order contracting program. Gordian charges fees totaling 5% if and when a job order is issued to a job order contractor, based on the value of the work. BACKGROUND: Job Order Contracting (JOC) has become a crucial project delivery tool that allows Public Works to complete projects more quickly using fewer project management resources. JOC programs rely upon a Job Order Contracting Program Development and Implementation consultant and the consultant’s proprietary software and implementation solutions. On January 9, 2024, the Board of Supervisors approved staff report # 24-0114 authorizing execution of a CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0591,Version:1 contract with Gordian in an amount not to exceed $1,750,000, to provide Job Order Contracting Program development and implementation services for various County projects for the period from January 9, 2024 through January 8, 2027, which may be extended to January 8, 2029, if elected by the Public Works Director. The purpose of this staff report is twofold: (a) to clarify contract provisions related to Consultant’s license agreement so that the provisions are in keeping with Consultant’s latest proprietary software and implementation solutions, and (b) to modify the contract term slightly to better coordinate with the transition from the County’s expiring JOC Program Development and Implementation Services contract to this new contract. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the modifications to contract provisions related to Consultant’s license agreement are not approved, the County will not be able to utilize Consultant’s currently offered proprietary software and implementation solutions, and the County would be unable to execute a contract with the Gordian. Consequently, the County’s JOC program would lapse. Without this procurement option, the County does not have the resources to complete all of its capital improvement projects now or in the foreseeable future. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0592 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Bay Point and Saranap areas. (100% State Department of Transportation Grant Funds) Attachments:1. CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and take related actions under CEQA ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project (Project)and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise the Project,Bay Point and Saranap areas.[County Project No. WO7079, DCD-CP#23-37] (Districts V, II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 2(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $2,100,000. 100% State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Grant Funds. BACKGROUND: The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0),which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025.The project will install two subsurface trash capture devices,certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),one in Bay Point and one in Saranap,which will help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0592,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project may result in a delay of design,construction,funding,and compliance with the SWRCB mandate. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0592 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Bay Point and Saranap areas. (100% State Department of Transportation Grant Funds) Attachments:1. CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project and take related actions under CEQA ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE the Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation Project (Project)and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise the Project,Bay Point and Saranap areas.[County Project No. WO7079, DCD-CP#23-37] (Districts V, II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 2(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $2,100,000. 100% State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Grant Funds. BACKGROUND: The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0),which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025.The project will install two subsurface trash capture devices,certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),one in Bay Point and one in Saranap,which will help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0592,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project may result in a delay of design,construction,funding,and compliance with the SWRCB mandate. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Bay Point and Saranap Full Trash Capture Installation, Project# WO7079, and CP# 23-37 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Contact: Shravan Sundaram (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at two locations in Contra Costa County: 1. The intersection of Alves Lane and Willow Pass Road, in the unincorporated community of Bay Point and 2. The intersection of Flora Avenue and Boulevard Way, in the unincorporated community of Saranap Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Contact: Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project will install subsurface trash capture devices certified by the State Water Resources Control Board at the two locations identified above. The County is a permittee of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 3.0), which mandates attainment of a 100 percent trash load reduction to receiving waters by 2025. This project would help the County meet this mandate by treating areas with moderate or greater trash load rates within approximately 115 acres of Bay Point and 150 acres of Saranap, and preventing trash from reaching Suisun Bay, local tributaries, and Las Trampas Creek. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2024 and take approximately 50 working days to complete. Ground disturbance and excavation will occur to a maximum depth of approximately 14 feet. Applicable best management practices (BMPs) such as storm drain inlet protection will be implemented. No tree removal is anticipated but vegetation removal may be necessary. Traffic controls will be needed for the duration of construction at both locations. Utility relocations and real property transactions may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15302(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The project consists of reconstructing existing storm drain facilities with subsurface trash capture devices, involving negligible or no expansion of capacity, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15302(c) of the CEQA guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date _____________ Title Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 01/16/2024 Senior Planner \\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\Flood Control\Full Trash Capture-Saranap, Bay Point (WO#7079)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#23-37 NOE Bay Point Saranap.docx Revised 2018 0BAFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ PROJECT LOCATIONS CA-4 E CA-4 W Willow Pass Rd Bailey RdCana l Rd Pacifica Ave E v o r a R d Port Chicago HwyBailey RdWillow Pass Rd Bailey RdCanal Rd ¬«4 ¬«4 State Hwy 4 Leland Willow Pass BaileyHill Canal KevinAnchor Siino AlvesSolanoF Bel Air E EnesB D MadisonC A G Pacifica Pullman Walkway MarinVirgil Port ChicagoPomoBroadwayBella VistaKimMarysDrivewayPoinsettiaFranklinDelta de Anza Gregory AlbertsFairviewSharon San MarcoTinaAmbrosePla c e r Bella MonteClevelandCrivelloW aterBay Lisa A n n G oble WeldonLynbrook Roy Virginia HighwaySteeleGibsonAgua Rose Me da n os ManorUnnamed Street Winterbrook Suisun MendocinoTormeyDeltaHarvey SaponeClearlandNapa Ramp NorthDesaniePamelaChandlerRiversidePuebloGeoffrey Ashbridge Bay 4WD RoadDeltaview M ary AnnLaneCamino Andres CurtisBlaineShorev i ewThelmaS u m m erfieldSan JoaquinBradfordDanielle RheaC h a d w i c k KlamathDilly M em orialMichaelClement CalaverasButteKingsSara Beverly Je ff er s o n C o n nie LancasterTomales BayA m b r o s ia DeanzaShellieKennethBri onesLaura AnnTammy Banchio Lincoln GeraldWashington Delta de Anza Driveway Unnamed StreetLaneDrivewayLelandRampDriveway HillRamp DrivewayState Hwy 4 CanalCanal U nnam ed S treetRamp San MarcoWater Unnamed StreetBel Air Willow Creek. 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectBay Point Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\BayPoint.mxd §¨¦680 §¨¦680 I-680 S I-680 N Olympic BlvdCamino Diablo CA-24 ECA-2 4 W B oulevard W aySpringbrook Rd N Ma i n St El Curtola BlvdN Br oa dwa yN Ca l i f or ni a Bl vdPl easant Hi l l RdK inney D rMt Diablo BlvdCivic DrS Main StN e w e ll A v e Saranap Ave Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd Olympic BlvdC a m i n o D i a b l o B o ule v ar d Wa y Springbrook Rd O l d T u n n e l R d S C alif o r nia B lv d ¬«24¬«24 I 680Main N e w e llJuanitaLocustCamino Di abl oEl CurtolaBoulevardMt Diablo Cal i forni aLelandSaranapW a r r e n Trinity KinneyOaklandLilac O lym picAl pi neState Hwy 24 DewingAcaciaWindsor S h u e yMagnol i aLucy B o te lh o FloraCondit O l d T u n n e l BonanzaP a rkAlmond Ce n t e rSunset Arl e n e Oakvale Lily Cole ArbutusExit 14 V i l l a BridgeBlade C y p r e s s Dunsyre Commer ci al Will o wNogalesH illcr oft Bont Paulson Poplar K e lle y L eeD o r a H en ri H il l R o seHidden OaksC ir c le Twin PeaksAl d e r Mars Meek KendallCam eliaHilton RuthDaleCarolynI r i sAcorn M a ryo la Orchard A lm a BajaT erraceNicholson SanfordSharpe A l t a H i l lCloverLoveland R ic h a r d Lindsey F r e e m a nMelody SequoiaR a n d a l l Ca rr o l RegencyBonitaMolly Peterson Linda Vista FordWhyte ParkPalomaresDel HambreSherwoodHillcrest StowStanleyAzal eaSam anthaPatty G r e e n B a y Parkmead Ra m p EvergreenR aintre e Royal GlenMa n z a nit a Unnamed StreetGreenePetticoat AllendaleAutumn TrailWilloughby Steele RampKendall Hilton I 680Newell Vi llaState Hwy 24 R elie z C r e e k Tic e C r e e k . 0 0.50.25 Miles PROJECT VICINITY MAPFull Trash Capture ProjectSeranap Project No.:DATE:Nov 2023 1 1Page of Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, Proposed Project By: Document Path: G:\fldctl\Watershed Planning - Engineering\Trash Capture\Locations\Seranap.mxd 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0593 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/3/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work, for routine maintenance and repair of existing road pavement, Countywide. (100% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work, Countywide ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work,for routine maintenance and repair of existing road pavement, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the 2024 On-Call Pavement Grinding Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work to provide supplemental grinding services,as needed,to the Public Works Maintenance crews for the removal of damaged asphalt concrete in support of pavement maintenance operations in various locations throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one $200,000 contract,but not more than two $200,000 contracts to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two one- year extensions and will be used as needed with no minimum amount that has to be spent. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0593,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0594 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s) for various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work, for routine maintenance and repair of concrete structures within road and flood control right-of-way, Countywide. (100% Local Road and Flood Control Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise for the 2024 On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s) for Various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s)for Various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work,for routine maintenance and repair of concrete structures within road and Flood Control right-of-way, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road and Flood Control Funds BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the On-Call Concrete Services Contract(s)for Various Road and Flood Control Maintenance Work to provide supplemental services,as needed,to the Public Works Maintenance crews for routine road and flood control maintenance and repairs in various locations throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one $150,000 contract,but not more than three $150,000 contracts to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two one-year extensions and will be used, as needed, with no minimum amount that has to be spent. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road and flood control maintenance work in a CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0594,Version:1 The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road and flood control maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0595 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/10/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance Work for routine maintenance of existing road pavement, Countywide. (100% Local Road Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise the 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work for routine maintenance of existing road pavement, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road Funds. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the 2024 On-Call Sweeping Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance Work to provide supplemental sweeping services,as needed,to Public Works Maintenance crews for routine road maintenance and repairs in various locations within Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one (1)$600,000 contract,but not more than four (4) $600,000 contracts,to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two (2) one-year extensions, and will be used, as needed, without a minimum amount that has to be spent. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0595,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If this contract is not awarded,the Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0596 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/7/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s) for various Road Maintenance, Flood Control, and Facilities Maintenance Work to provide fencing services including, but not limited to, installation, repair, replacement, or removal of fences and gates. (100% Local Road, Flood Control, Airport, Special Revenue, and General Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Advertise for the 2024 On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s) for Various Road Maintenance, Flood Control, and Facilities Maintenance Work, Countywide. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to advertise for the 2024 On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance,Flood Control,and Facilities Maintenance Work to provide fencing services including, but not limited to, installation, repair, replacement, or removal of fences and gates. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% Local Road, Flood Control, and General Funds. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks and channels, and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department will use the On-Call Fencing Services Contract(s)for Various Road Maintenance,Flood Control,and Facilities Maintenance Work to provide supplemental services,as needed,to the Public Works maintenance crews for routine road,flood control,and facilities maintenance and repairs in various locations throughout Contra Costa County. The Public Works Department intends to award at least one (1)$400,000 contract,but not more than four (4) $400,000 contracts to the responsible bidder(s).Each contract will have a term of one year with the option of two one-year extensions and will be used, as needed, with no minimum amount that has to be spent. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road,flood control,and/or facilities CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0596,Version:1 The Public Works Department may be unable to complete routine road,flood control,and/or facilities maintenance work in a timely manner. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0597 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/30/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ACCEPT the 2023 Semi-Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisition Acceptances dated July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023, approved by the Public Works Director as submitted, Discovery Bay and San Pablo areas. (100% Various Roads and Flood Control Funds) Attachments:1. 7-1-23 - 12-31-23 Report Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:ACCEPT the 2023 Semi-Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisition Acceptances dated July 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the 2023 Semi-Annual Report of Real Estate Acquisition Acceptances dated July 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023, approved by the Public Works Director for the acquisitions of any interest in real property where the purchase price for the real property interest did not exceed $100,000 in Discovery Bay and San Pablo Areas. FISCAL IMPACT: 100% various road and flood control funds covered costs related to staff time and purchase price. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the Contra Costa County, Ordinance Code 2019-35, Title 11, Division 1108, Chapter 1108-8.002, “The Board of Supervisors authorizes the Public Works Director, or his or her designated deputy, to perform all acts necessary to approve and accept for the County the acquisition of any interest in real property where the purchase price for the real property interest does not exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).” The Public Works Director shall submit a semi-annual report to the Board of Supervisors on each acquisition done pursuant to this section, including the interest acquired, its price, and the necessity for the purchase, which is described in the attached Semi-Annual Acceptance Report. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0597,Version:1 The Board of Supervisors would not be informed of the acquisitions accepted by the Public Works Director pursuant to Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Acceptance Report of Real Estate Acquisition July 1, 2023 - December 31, 2023 CERT. NO.AREA PROJECT/PURPOSE INTEREST PRICE 23-60 Discovery Bay Bixler & Regatta Rd. Intersection Improvement Project Roadway Easement N/A 23-63 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2407 Tara Hills Dr.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-64 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2505 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-65 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2511 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-66 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2517 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-67 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2585 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-68 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2560 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-69 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2540 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-70 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2550 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-71 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2560 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A G:\realprop\BOARD ORDERS-STAFF REPORTS\2024\02-27-2024 Real Estate Acceptances\7-1-23 - 12-31-23 Report Acceptance Report of Real Estate Acquisition July 1, 2023 - December 31, 2023 CERT. NO.AREA PROJECT/PURPOSE INTEREST PRICE 23-72 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2570 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-73 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2578 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-74 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2588 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-75 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2664 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A 23-76 San Pablo Acceptance of Drainage Reserve 2673 Brian Rd.Drainage Reserve N/A G:\realprop\BOARD ORDERS-STAFF REPORTS\2024\02-27-2024 Real Estate Acceptances\7-1-23 - 12-31-23 Report 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-48 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/6/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RESCIND Resolution No. 2024-21 adopted on January 16, 2024 (C.92) and ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-48 granting a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305 for pipelines located in the unincorporated area of the County near Pacheco, Clayton, and Byron, as recommended by the Public Works Director. (100% Pipeline Franchise Fees) Attachments:1. Exhibit 1 Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Granting of a Pipeline Franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RESCIND Resolution No. 2024-21 adopted on January 16, 2024 (C.92) and ADOPT Resolution granting a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305 for pipelines located in the unincorporated area of the County near Pacheco, Clayton, and Byron, as recommended by the Public Works Director. FISCAL IMPACT: The pipeline franchise will generate approximately $14,500 per year commencing with calendar year 2023. The annual franchise payment will be calculated at the rate of $1.77 per cubic foot of pipeline within the County right-of-way. The number of cubic feet of pipeline subject to the franchise fee rate will be calculated by taking the area of the inside diameter of the pipeline plus 1” and multiplying it by the length of the pipeline within the County right-of-way. The annual franchise fee rate of $1.77 per cubic foot is increased annually by the change in the Consumer Price Index, all Urban Consumers for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Area (1982-84 = 100), with December 2012 (239.53) as the base CPI month. BACKGROUND: On January 16, 2024, this Board approved Resolution No. 2024-21 which granted a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC. The staff report and Resolution No. 2024-21 incorrectly listed the Vine Hill Crude Oil Pipeline as a nitrogen line instead of a crude oil pipeline. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-48,Version:1 On August 13, 2013, this Board adopted Ordinance No. 2013-19 (establishing regulations for granting pipeline franchises in County rights-of-way) and Resolution No. 2013/305 (establishing pipeline franchise fee amounts). The 10” Vine Hill Crude pipeline described in the table below was previously covered under an existing County pipeline franchise granted to Equilon Enterprises LLC through the adoption of Resolution No. 2016/619. The 20” Coalinga Avon pipeline described in the table below was previously covered under an existing County pipeline franchise granted to San Pablo Bay Pipeline Company LLC through the adoption of Resolution No. 2016/623. Effective March 1, 2020, Crimson Pipeline, LLC has acquired these two pipelines. Crimson Pipeline, LLC has filed written documentation with the County, wherein it has requested the granting of the new pipeline franchise for the transportation of crude oil pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305. Crimson Pipeline, LLC also provided a $5,000 deposit to cover all administrative costs associated with the granting of this pipeline franchise as required by Ordinance No. 2013-19 and Resolution No. 2013/305. Approval of Resolution No. 2024-___ will grant a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC for the pipelines shown in the table below for an initial term of 10 years. Pipeline Name Type Diameter Length Vine Hill Crude Crude Oil 10"3,439 ft Coalinga Avon Crude Oil 20"1,409 ft CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Crimson Pipeline, LLC will have a franchise with Contra Costa County that includes inaccurate pipeline information. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-48,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF a resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa authorizing the granting of a Pipeline Franchise to Crimson Pipeline, LLC. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa finds and declares: WHEREAS, on August 13, 2013, this Board adopted: Ordinance No. 2013-19 (establishing regulations for granting pipeline franchises in County rights-of-way), which became effective September 12, 2013; and Resolution No. 2013/305 (establishing pipeline franchise fee amounts). WHEREAS, Crimson Pipeline, LLC has filed a written application with the County, wherein it has requested the granting of a pipeline franchise pursuant to the terms and conditions of County Ordinance No. 2013-19 and County Resolution No. 2013/305. WHEREAS, Crimson Pipeline, LLC has identified the following two pipelines, which it owns and will be covered under the proposed pipeline franchise as: 1.Vine Hill Pipeline - 10-inch diameter, 3,439 feet crude oil. 2.Coalinga Avon Pipeline - 20-inch diameter, 1,409 feet crude oil. WHEREAS, the crude oil pipelines to be covered under the pipeline franchise were covered under existing County pipeline franchises. WHEREAS, the County has reviewed the application as well as relevant documents, staff reports, and recommendation and it is the intent of the Board to grant a pipeline franchise to Crimson Pipeline LLC pursuant to Ordinance 2013-19 and Resolution 2013/305. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1.The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County finds and declares that the foregoing recitals are true and correct. 2.Pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013-19, a franchise to operate a 10-inch diameter crude oil pipeline bisecting the County from east to west and crossing various County rights of way for a lineal distance of approximately 3,439 feet (Vine Hill Pipeline) is hereby granted to Crimson Pipeline, LLC, for a term of 10 years. 3.Pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013-19, a franchise to operate a 20-inch diameter crude oil pipeline bisecting the County from north to south and crossing various County rights of way for a lineal distance of approximately 1,409 feet (Coalinga Avon Pipeline) is hereby granted to Crimson Pipeline, LLC, for a term of 10 years. 4.The general location of the pipelines is depicted on the maps attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 5.The annual franchise payment to be paid pursuant to County Resolution 2013/305 shall be calculated at the rate of $1.77 per cubic foot of pipeline within the County right-of-way. The number of cubic feet of pipeline CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-48,Version:1 subject to the franchise fee rate will be calculated by taking the area of the inside diameter of the pipeline plus 1” and multiplying it by the length of the line within the County right-of-way. The annual franchise fee rate of $1.77 per cubic foot is increased annually by the change in the Consumer Price Index, all Urban Consumers for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Area (1982-84 = 100), with December 2012 (239.53) as the base CPI month. 6.The Director of Public Works, or his designee, is authorized to administer the pipeline franchise granted pursuant to this resolution. 7.The Resolution shall take effect upon the following: Within 30 days of the date of this Resolution, Crimson Pipeline, LLC must file with the Public Works Department the following: (1) a written acceptance of the terms and conditions of the franchise granted pursuant to this Resolution, Ordinance No. 2013-19, and Resolution No. 2013/305; (2) a performance bond in the form approved by the Board; and, (3) insurance coverage as required by Ordinance 2013-19..end CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ 88' Across Marsh Creek Rd within County ROW 954' Across Marsh Creek Rd within County ROWMARSH C R E E K R DPINE LNRUSSELMANN PARK ROADLegend Parcel Lines Coalinga to Avon 20" Pipeline Sheet 1 of 2 Exhibit 1 Crimson Pipeline LLC 20" Pipeline - Contra Costa County ROW Crossing Locations Exhibit 1 APN: 005-180-007 APN: 005-170-006 APN: 005-170-012 Vasco Rd APN: 078-320-003 APN: 078-320-003 APN: 080-050-003 Marsh Creek RdSheet 2 of 2 262' Across Vasco Rd within County ROW 105' Across Marsh Creek Rd within County ROW Legend Parcel Lines Coalinga to Avon 20" Pipeline Exhibit 1 Crimson Pipeline LLC 20" Pipeline - Contra Costa County ROW Crossing Locations 3,439' Along Pacheco Blvd in County ROW Pache c o B l v d Via E s t r e l l a Camino del SolGoree CtAdelaide DrSodaro DrMacmurtry DrDe Normandie WayWindhover WayKaren LnVia de FloresEllis R dCormorant CtGiannini RdKennedy Way Corte CleloLegend Parcel Lines 10" Vine Hill Crude Pipeline Crimson Pipeline LLC 10" Pipeline - Contra Costa County ROW Crossing Locations Exhibit 1 Exhibit 1 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-49 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-49 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive, on March 7, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue, on March 7, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution No.approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive,on March 7,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department to maintain public safety.Pacific Gas and Electric Company is requesting to close a portion of Beloit Avenue for traffic safety due to the narrow roadway at the construction site. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-49,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive,on March 7,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-5 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to PG&E to fully close Beloit Avenue between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Los Altos Drive,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 7,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m.through 5:00 p.m.,subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the construction area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.PG&E shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District and the Kensington Fire Protection District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-49,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-50 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-50 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve and Authorize to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department.Pacific Gas &Electric Company is requesting a road closure to replace a utility pole.The construction team indicated that a road closure is necessary for the requested work to be done safely due to the narrow road. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-50,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF: Approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive, on April 3, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of a utility pole, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-6 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close a portion of Los Altos Drive between Grizzly Peak Boulevard and 255 Los Altos Drive,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on April 3,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and Kensington Fire Department. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-51 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-51 for the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, Alamo area. (86% Alamo Area of Benefit Funds, 11% Transportation Development Act Funds, 3% Local Road Funds) Attachments:1. Attachment A to Resolution.pdf, 2. Attachment B to Resolution.pdf, 3. CP#24-04 NOE Miranda Ave TDA-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project and take related actions under CEQA, Alamo area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution to APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the total amount of $120,000 for the fiscal year 2024/2025 for the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project. APPROVE the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School Project,and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project, Alamo area. [County Project No. WO1025, DCD-CP#24-04] (District II) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 1(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost:$1,070,000.(86%Alamo Area of Benefit (AOB)Funds,11%Transportation Development Act Funds, 3% Local Road Funds) BACKGROUND: Miranda Avenue is the primary road used by students,parents,and faculty traveling to Stone Valley Middle CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-51,Version:1 Miranda Avenue is the primary road used by students,parents,and faculty traveling to Stone Valley Middle School.Contra Costa County staff have coordinated with the school’s faculty who reported that students often travel along the existing unpaved shoulder throughout the school year.These students have been observed walking near motorists and bicyclists.The proposed improvements will provide a separate pathway that accommodates all pedestrian users in all-weather situations.This project will enhance safety and accessibility along the west side of Miranda Avenue,serving pedestrians and bicyclists between Stone Valley Road and Stone Valley Middle School.The improvements include the construction of a 5-foot-wide pedestrian pathway compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)at a length of approximately 1,650 feet.The existing bike lane adjacent to the pathway will be restored to a five-foot width. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If TDA funding is not obtained, the Project will not be constructed. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-51,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)in the amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School; WHEREAS,Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA),Public Utilities Code (PUC)Section 99200 et seq.,authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS,the MTC,as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region,has adopted MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised,entitled “Transportation Development Act,Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,”which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS,MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single,countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS,Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide transportation planning agency,or county association of governments,as the case may be,of Contra Costa CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-51,Version:1 County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Attachment A to Resolution Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right of way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right of way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA Article 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document. 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. Attachment B to Resolution TDA Article 3 Project Application Form 1. Agency Contra Costa County Public Works Department 2. Primary Contact Joe Smithonic 3. Mailing Address 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 4. Email Address Joe.Smithonic@pw.cccounty.us 5. Phone Number (925) 313-2348 6. Secondary Contact (in the event primary is not available) Brian Louis 7. Mailing address (if different) N/A☒ 8. Email Address Brian.Louis@pw.cccounty.us 9. Phone Number (925) 313-2304 10. Send allocation instructions to (if different from above): 11. Project Title Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School 12. Amount requested $120,000 13. Fiscal Year of Claim 2024/2025 14. Description of Overall Project: 15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.) 16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below: Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only) 17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒ 18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒ This project will construct a new at-grade and all-weather pedestrian pathway and restore the existing bicycle lane on the west side of Miranda Avenue between Stone Valley Middle School and Stone Valley Road. Engineering and Construction costs. A map of the project location is attached. 19. Project Budget and Schedule Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year) Bike/Ped Plan - ENV 12,000 12,000 01/2024 PA&ED 12,000 12,000 06/2025 PS&E 20,000 27,000 47,000 12/2025 ROW 99,000 99,000 03/2026 CON 100,000 618,000 718,000 08/2026 Total Cost 120,000 768,000 888,000 Project Eligibility A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☒ No☐ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda. If "NO," provide an explanation). B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date: February 27, 2024 C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page) D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☒ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility? 2. If “NO” above, is the project exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☒ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate. F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): __________________ G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement. H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project? Yes☒ No☐ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the form may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets "\\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Miranda Ave Safe Routes to School (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Draft to DCD\CP#24- 04 NOE Miranda Ave TDA.docx" Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-04 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Izaac Tompkins, (925) 313-2176 Project Location: Miranda Avenue between Stone Valley Road and Stone Valley Middle School in unincorporated Alamo, Contra Costa County Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The purpose of the project is to enhance safety and accessibility along the west side of Miranda Avenue, serving pedestrians and bicyclists between Stone Valley Road and Stone Valley Middle School. The improvements include the construction of a 5-foot-wide pedestrian pathway compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) at a length of approximately 1,650 feet. The existing bike lane adjacent to the pathway will be restored to a five-foot width. Ground disturbance is anticipated up to a depth of 18 inches for soil to be excavated and replaced with aggregate base to install the pedestrian path and restore the bicycle lane. Construction is anticipated to occur in 2026 and take approximately 30 days to complete. Construction will have no impact on school hours. General construction best management practices for water pollution control will be implemented such as storm drain inlet protection and sediment control at creek crossings will be implemented throughout the construction period. Up to three native oak trees within the County right-of-way are anticipated to be removed. Real property transactions, temporary traffic control, and vegetation trimming may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity involves the repair and minor alteration of existing public facilities with negligible or no expansion of existing use pursuant to Article 19, Section, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant January 23, 2024 Senior Planner "\\PW-DATA\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Miranda Ave Safe Routes to School (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Draft to DCD\CP#24- 04 NOE Miranda Ave TDA.docx" Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Izaac Tompkins Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2176 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: SHEET OF DATE: DB: CB: PROJECT LOCATION ATTACHMENT 1: PROJECT LOCATION MAP Miranda Avenue Safe Routes to School BL NOV 23 1 1 255 GLACIER DRIVE, MARTINEZ, CA 94553 PH: (925)313-2000 FAX: (925)313-2333 4 Bay Point JV 255 GLACIER D RIVE MARTINEZ, CALIFORN IA 94553 PH : (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333 PROJEC T VICINITY MAP - CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Miranda Avenue Sa fe Rou tes to School FEDERAL ID NO:DB: CB:DATE:BL NOV 2023 1 1Page of JS 0 500 1,000250Fe et ± Stone Valley Middle School < BEGIN P ROJECT MI RANDA AV E STONE VALLEY RDINTERS TATE 680EN D PR OJ ECT > Downt own Alamo I RON HORS E RE GI ONAL T RAI L Miranda AveRemove treeEnd projectConform to existingconcrete DrivewayMeganCourt Stone Valley Road Miranda AveFence encroaches R/W at creekFile Path G:\transeng\GRANTS\Transportation Development Act (TDA)\TDA 24-25\Applications\Miranda Ave\Miranda_2.dwt Plot Date:11/30/2023 4:30:39 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE:1" = 30'PRELIMINARY PLANMiranda Avenue Safe Routes to SchoolStone Valley Road to Stone Valley Middle School DRAWN BY: BL CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 2 OF 2 DATE: 11/30/2023MIRANDA_2.DWT CAD FILE:Match Sheet BottomMatch Sheet Top Match Sheet 1 Bottom Stone Valley Middle SchoolMiranda AveLas Quebradas Miranda CourtBegin projectBolla Acres Ditch Miranda Ave Bolla Ave Tributary to SanRamon CreekFile Path G:\transeng\GRANTS\Transportation Development Act (TDA)\TDA 24-25\Applications\Miranda Ave\Miranda_2.dwt Plot Date:11/30/2023 4:30:08 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE:1" = 30'PRELIMINARY PLANMiranda Avenue Safe Routes to SchoolStone Valley Road to Stone Valley Middle School DRAWN BY: BL CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 1 OF 2 DATE: 11/30/2023MIRANDA_2.DWT CAD FILE:5' (typ)Proposed pedestrian path at gradeLEGENDExisting fenceRestore existing bike laneExisting road centerlineExisting drainageExisting treeAsphalt bermMatch Sheet Bottom5' (typ)Match Sheet Top Match Sheet 2 Top 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-52 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-52 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue, on March 21, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of four utility poles, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue, on March 21, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue,on March 21,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of four utility poles, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department.Pacific Gas &Electric Company is requesting a road closure to replace four utility poles.The construction team indicated that a road closure is necessary for the requested work to be done safely due to the narrow road. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Patel, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-52,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue,on March 21,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of four utility poles, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-2 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close a portion of Willamette Avenue between Highland Boulevard and Purdue Avenue,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 21,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and Kensington Fire Department. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-61 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-61 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, Discovery Bay area. (38% Transportation Development Act Funds, 62% Local Road Funds) Attachments:1. Attachment A to Resolution - Timber Point Crosswalks.pdf, 2. Attachment B to Resolution - Timber Point Crosswalks.pdf, 3. CP#24-02 NOE Timber Point Crosswalk TDA-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project and take related actions under CEQA, Discovery Bay area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution to APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the total amount of $120,000 for the fiscal year 2024/2025 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project. APPROVE the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements Project,and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee,to advertise the Project,Discovery Bay area.[County Project No.WO1025,DCD-CP#24-02] (District III) DETERMINE the Project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 1(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development,or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $320,000. (38% Transportation Development Act Funds, 62% Local Road Funds) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-61,Version:1 BACKGROUND: This project will improve public safety for pedestrians and vehicles at the five pedestrian crosswalks in the community surrounding Timber Point Elementary School in Discovery Bay.Improvements will increase pedestrian visibility and ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).These improvements include installing rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs),electrical power boxes,and detectable warning surfaces at the crosswalk curb ramps,new crosswalk striping,and modifications to existing striping. Existing crosswalks will be upgraded to yellow continental style crosswalks. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If TDA funding is not obtained, the Project will not be constructed. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)in the total amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements. WHEREAS,Article 3 of the TDA,Public Utilities Code (PUC)Section 99200 et seq.,authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS,the MTC,as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region,has adopted MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised,entitled “Transportation Development Act,Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,”which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS,MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single,countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS,Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-61,Version:1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide transportation planning agency,or county association of governments,as the case may be,of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Resolution No. 2024/ Attachment A Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA A rticle 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document . 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. Resolution No. 2024/ IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in the total amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements. WHEREAS, Article 3 of the TDA, Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99200 et seq., authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS, the MTC, as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region, has adopted MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised, entitled “Transportation Development Act, Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,” which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS, MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single, countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS, Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code ; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments, and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency, countywide transportation planning agency, or county association of governments, as the case may be, of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. Contra Costa County adopted this resolution on February 27, 2024. AYES: NAYS: Certified to by (signature): TYPE NAME OF CERTIFYING INDIVIDUAL HERE Resolution No. 2024/ Attachment A Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA A rticle 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document . 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. Resolution No. 2024/ Page 1 of 2 Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form 1. Agency Contra Costa County Public Works Department 2. Primary Contact Joe Smithonic 3. Mailing Address 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 4. Email Address Joe.Smithonic@pw.cccounty.us 5. Phone Number 925-313-2348 6. Secondary Contact (in the event primary is not available) Deborah Preciado 7. Mailing address (if different) N/A☐ 8. Email Address Deborah.Preciado@pw.cccounty.us 9. Phone Number 925-313-2267 10. Send allocation instructions to (if different from above): 11. Project Title Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements 12. Amount requested $120,000 13. Fiscal Year of Claim 2024/2025 14. Description of Overall Project: 15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.) 16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below: Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only) 17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒ 18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒ Construct crosswalk improvements at five locations surrounding the Timber Point Elementary School community. Improvements include restriping crosswalks, installing RRFBs, signs, and ADA compliant detectable warning surfaces. Engineering and Construction costs. A map of the project location is attached. Resolution No. 2024/ Page 2 of 2 19. Project Budget and Schedule Project Eligibility A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☒ No☐ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda. December 12, 2023 If "NO," provide an explanation). B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date: February 27, 2024 C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page) D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☐ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? N/A E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility? 2. If “NO” above, is the project is exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☒ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate. F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): June 2026 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement. H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project ? Yes☒ No☐ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the form may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year) Bike/Ped Plan ENV 6,000 6,000 02/2024 PA&ED 12,000 12,000 01/2025 PS&E 40,000 7,000 47,000 09/2025 ROW CON 80,000 179,000 259,000 06/2026 Total Cost 120,000 204,000 324,000 \\pw-data\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Point of Timber Ave Crosswalk, DB (WO1025)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#24-02 NOE Timber Point Crosswalk TDA.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-02 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Shravan Sundaram, (925) 313-2366 Project Location: The project will take place at five intersections: 1. Newport Drive and Cambridge Way, 2. Newport Drive and Worthing Way, 3. Newbury Lane and Preston Drive, 4. Newbury Lane and Amesbury Court, and 5. Point of Timber Road and Preston Drive; all of which are in unincorporated Discovery Bay, Contra Costa County, CA 94505. Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: This project will improve public safety for pedestrians and vehicles at the five pedestrian crosswalks at the intersections identified above. Improvements will increase pedestrian visibility and ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). These improvements include installing Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), electrical power boxes, and detectable warning surfaces at the crosswalk curb ramps, new crosswalk striping, and modifications to existing striping. Existing crosswalks will be upgraded to yellow continental style crosswalks. Ground disturbance is anticipated to occur to a maximum depth of 6 feet for installation of RRFBs and include minor concrete demolition and removal, formwork, and concrete/pavement work. Construction is anticipated to occur in 2026 and take approximately 30 days to complete. Real property transactions, utility relocations, temporary traffic control, and vegetation trimming may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity consists of improving existing crosswalks for public safety and ADA compliance along an existing street with no expansion of use, pursuant to Article 19, Section, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant January 23, 2024 Senior Planner \\pw-data\grpdata\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Point of Timber Ave Crosswalk, DB (WO1025)\CEQA\NOE\To DCD\CP#24-02 NOE Timber Point Crosswalk TDA.docx Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Shravan Sundaram Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2366 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: SHEET OF DATE: DB: CB: PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT LOCATION MAP Timber Point Crosswalk Improvements DP NOV 23 1 1 255 GLACIER DRIVE, MARTINEZ, CA 94553 PH: (925)313-2000 FAX: (925)313-2333 4 BAY POINT JS DISCOVERY BAY Bixler RdNewport DrSlifer D rPoint of Timber Rd Amesbury CtPreston DrNewberry Ln Point of Timber Rd 255 GLACIER D RIVE MARTINEZ, CALIFORN IA 94553 PH : (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333 PROJEC T VICINITY MAP - CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Timber Poi nt Crossw alk Improvemen ts FEDERAL ID NO:DB: CB:DATE:DP NOV 2023 1 1Page of JS 0 500 1,000250Fe et ±5 3 1 4 Timber P oint Elementary Schoo l Slifer Pa rk 1. Newport Dr and Cambr idge Way 2. Newport Dr and Worthing Way 3. Newbury Ln and Preston Dr 4. Newbury Ln and Amesbur y Ct 5. Point of Timber Rd and Pr eston Dr Cros swal k Lo cations 2 Rav enswood Park 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-60 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-60 for the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to advertise the Project and submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the amount of $120,000, for fiscal year 2024/2025, El Sobrante area. (31% Transportation Development Act Funds, 69% Local Road Funds) Attachments:1. Attachment A to Resolution.pdf, 2. Attachment B to Resolution.pdf, 3. CP#24-05 NOE and Figures Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements-signed.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:APPROVE the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project and take related actions under CEQA, El Sobrante area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution to APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the total amount of $120,000 for the fiscal year 2024/2025 for the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project. APPROVE the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project,and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee, to advertise the Project, El Sobrante area. [County Project No. WO1025, DCD-CP#24-05] (District I) DETERMINE the project is a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),Class 1(c)Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and DIRECT the Director of Department of Conservation and Development (DCD),or designee,to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk, and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to DCD for processing, and a $50 fee to the County Clerk for filing the NOE. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated Project cost: $385,000. (31% Transportation Development Act Funds, 69% Local Road Funds) BACKGROUND: The project consists of constructing a new pedestrian crossing facility across Olinda Road approximately 70 feet east of Olinda Elementary School.The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk,a speed CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-60,Version:1 feet east of Olinda Elementary School.The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk,a speed table,Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)compliant curb ramps,and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs).The existing deficient crosswalk located approximately 165 feet east of Olinda Elementary School will be removed.The new eight-foot-wide crosswalk will be striped with high-visibility yellow traffic paint on top of a 20-foot-wide speed table. RRFBs will be constructed at each end of the crossing facility. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If TDA funding is not obtained, the Project will not be constructed. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to submit a 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act (TDA)Grant Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)in the total amount of $120,000 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 for the Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements Project. WHEREAS,Article 3 of the TDA,Public Utilities Code (PUC)Section 99200 et seq.,authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS,the MTC,as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region,has adopted MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised,entitled “Transportation Development Act,Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,”which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS,MTC Resolution No.4108,Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single,countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS,Contra Costa County desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution,or that might impair the ability of Contra Costa County to carry out the project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that Contra Costa County attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments,and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-60,Version:1 accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency,countywide transportation planning agency,or county association of governments,as the case may be,of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Resolution No. 2024/XX Attachment A Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings 1. That Contra Costa County is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is Contra Costa County legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That Contra Costa County has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right -of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA A rticle 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by Contra Costa County within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document . 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That Contra Costa County agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the publi c. Resolution No. 2024/XX page 1 of 2 Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form 1. Agency Contra Costa County Public Works Department 2. Primary Contact Joe Smithonic 3. Mailing Address 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 4. Email Address Joe.Smithonic@pw.cccounty.us 5. Phone Number (925) 313-2348 6. Secondary Contact (in the event primary is not available) Mo Nasser 7. Mailing address (if different) N/A☒ 8. Email Address Mo.Nasser@pw.cccounty.us 9. Phone Number (925) 313-2178 10. Send allocation instructions to (if different from above): 11. Project Title Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements 12. Amount requested $120,000 13. Fiscal Year of Claim 2024/2025 14. Description of Overall Project: 15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.) 16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below: Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only) 17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒ 18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒ Project will construct a speed table with a new crosswalk and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon in front of Olinda Elementary School in El Sobrante. Engineering and Construction costs. A map of the project location is attached. Resolution No. 2024/XX page 2 of 2 19. Project Budget and Schedule Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year) Bike/Ped Plan - ENV 6,000 6,000 01/2024 PA&ED 12,000 12,000 06/2025 PS&E 47,000 - 47,000 12/2025 ROW 65,000 65,000 03/2026 CON 73,000 182,000 255,000 08/2026 Total Cost 120,000 265,000 385,000 Project Eligibility A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☒ No☐ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda. December 12, 2023 If "NO," provide an explanation). B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date: February 27, 2024 C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page) D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☐ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? N/A E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility? 2. If “NO” above, is the project is exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☒ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate. F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): August 2026 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement. H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project ? Yes☒ No☐ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the form may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-05 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Sandeep Kajla, (925) 313-2022 Project Location: Olinda Road between Archery Way and Castro Ranch Road, unincorporated El Sobrante, Contra Costa County. Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project consists of constructing a new pedestrian crossing facility across Olinda Road approximately 70 feet east of Olinda Elementary School. The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk, a speed table, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant curb ramps, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs). The existing deficient crosswalk located approximately 165 feet east of Olinda Elementary School will be removed. The new eight-foot-wide crosswalk will be striped with high-visibility yellow traffic paint on top of a 20-foot-wide speed table. RRFBs will be constructed at each end of the crossing facility. Four curbside parking spots will be removed when the widened curb ramps are installed, however, two parking spots will be added with the removal of the deficient crosswalk. The existing sidewalk will be demolished and excavated to 2 feet, and the new wider sidewalk and curb ramps will be installed. The locations of the RRFBs will be excavated to 6 feet to install the RRFB foundation. Existing asphalt in the location of the speed table will be excavated to one foot, followed by the application of hot mix asphalt and striping for the crosswalk. Construction is anticipated to occur during the summer of 2026, and will take approximately 20 days to complete. Construction will have no impact on school hours. No night or weekend work is anticipated. Real Estate transactions, utility relocations, temporary traffic control, and tree and vegetation trimming and removal may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity consists of constructing a pedestrian crossing facility along an existing street with no expansion of use, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 1/31/2024 Senior Planner G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Sandeep Kajla Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2022 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 2: Project Vicinity Map Project Site File Path \\PW-DATA\grpdata\transeng\Sidewalk Priority List\Project Files\Olinda Road\Olinda Road Final-MN Final.dwg Plot Date:11/30/2023 1:31:55 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE: 1" = 15'PRELIMINARY PLANOlinda Road, El Sobrante, CA DRAWN BY: MN CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 1 OF 1 DATE: 11/28/2023OLINDA ROAD FINAL-MN FINAL.DWG CAD FILE:7'Olinda Elementary School5852 Olinda Rd OLINDA ROAD CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTSRemoveExistingCrosswalk55'Typical Path forStudents, Parents,and FacultySpeed Table + Crosswalk(Refer to Cross Section)Speed Table AheadPavement MarkingsExisting SidewalkProposed SidewalkDetectable WarningSurfaceUtility PoleDrivewayCity/County LimitsRectangular RapidFlashing BeaconSign50' 'Speed Hump' +'15 MPH Speed Limit'Warning Signs40'LEGENDExistingBus StopCity of RichmondContra Costa CountySpeed Table Cross SectionFigure 3: Project Plan Sheet G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Notice of Exemption To: Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 From: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 County Clerk, County of Contra Costa Project Title: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements, Project #: WO1025, CP#: 24-05 Project Applicant: Contra Costa County Public Works Dept., 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 Main: (925) 313-2000, Contact: Sandeep Kajla, (925) 313-2022 Project Location: Olinda Road between Archery Way and Castro Ranch Road, unincorporated El Sobrante, Contra Costa County. Lead Agency: Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553 Main: (925) 655-2705, Contact: Syd Sotoodeh (925) 655-2877 Project Description: The project consists of constructing a new pedestrian crossing facility across Olinda Road approximately 70 feet east of Olinda Elementary School. The pedestrian crossing facility will consist of a crosswalk, a speed table, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant curb ramps, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs). The existing deficient crosswalk located approximately 165 feet east of Olinda Elementary School will be removed. The new eight-foot-wide crosswalk will be striped with high-visibility yellow traffic paint on top of a 20-foot-wide speed table. RRFBs will be constructed at each end of the crossing facility. Four curbside parking spots will be removed when the widened curb ramps are installed, however, two parking spots will be added with the removal of the deficient crosswalk. The existing sidewalk will be demolished and excavated to 2 feet, and the new wider sidewalk and curb ramps will be installed. The locations of the RRFBs will be excavated to 6 feet to install the RRFB foundation. Existing asphalt in the location of the speed table will be excavated to one foot, followed by the application of hot mix asphalt and striping for the crosswalk. Construction is anticipated to occur during the summer of 2026, and will take approximately 20 days to complete. Construction will have no impact on school hours. No night or weekend work is anticipated. Real Estate transactions, utility relocations, temporary traffic control, and tree and vegetation trimming and removal may be necessary. Exempt Status: Ministerial Project (Sec. 21080[b][1]; 15268) Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301(c)) Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080[b][3]; 15269[a]) General Rule of Applicability (Sec. 15061[b][3]) Emergency Project (Sec. 21080[b][4]; 15269[b][c]) Other Statutory Exemption (Sec. ) Reasons why project is exempt: The activity consists of constructing a pedestrian crossing facility along an existing street with no expansion of use, pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: _____________ Title: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant 1/31/2024 Senior Planner G:\engsvc\ENVIRO\TransEng\TDA Grant-Olinda Ave Crosswalk, El Sobrante (WO1025)\CEQA\CEQA Documents\NOE\Admin D1\NOE.docx Revised 2018 AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees Due Public Works Department De Minimis Finding - $0 255 Glacier Drive County Clerk - $50 Martinez, CA 94553 Conservation and Development - $25 Attn: Sandeep Kajla Environmental Services Division Phone: (925) 313-2022 Total Due: $75 Receipt #: Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map N↑ Olinda Road Crosswalk Improvements FIGURE 2: Project Vicinity Map Project Site File Path \\PW-DATA\grpdata\transeng\Sidewalk Priority List\Project Files\Olinda Road\Olinda Road Final-MN Final.dwg Plot Date:11/30/2023 1:31:55 PMContra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553PH: (925) 313-2000 FAX: (925) 313-2333SCALE: 1" = 15'PRELIMINARY PLANOlinda Road, El Sobrante, CA DRAWN BY: MN CHECKED BY: JS SHEET: 1 OF 1 DATE: 11/28/2023OLINDA ROAD FINAL-MN FINAL.DWG CAD FILE:7'Olinda Elementary School5852 Olinda Rd OLINDA ROAD CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTSRemoveExistingCrosswalk55'Typical Path forStudents, Parents,and FacultySpeed Table + Crosswalk(Refer to Cross Section)Speed Table AheadPavement MarkingsExisting SidewalkProposed SidewalkDetectable WarningSurfaceUtility PoleDrivewayCity/County LimitsRectangular RapidFlashing BeaconSign50' 'Speed Hump' +'15 MPH Speed Limit'Warning Signs40'LEGENDExistingBus StopCity of RichmondContra Costa CountySpeed Table Cross SectionFigure 3: Project Plan Sheet 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-53 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-53 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, on April 13, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m., for the purpose of allowing participants in a 5k foot race to gather safely, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue, on April 13, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue,on April 13,2024,from 7:00 a.m.through 11:30 a.m.,for the purpose of allowing participants in a 5k foot race to gather safely,Kensington area.(District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Zip Code East Bay,Inc.,shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department to maintain public safety.Zip Code East Bay,Inc.plans to fully close Oak View Avenue as a part of a 5K charity foot race taking place in the Kensington area.This block of Oak View Avenue is a short residential street that has been used for other community events in Kensington such as the weekly farmer’s market.This road closure allows community members and participants of the foot race to gather safely. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for the purpose of a 5k foot race gathering. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-53,Version:1 Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue,on April 13,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m.,for the purpose of allowing participants in a 5k foot race to gather safely,Kensington area. (District I) RC23-53 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Zip Code East Bay,Inc to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on April 13,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m.through 11:30 a.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Zip Code East Bay, Inc., shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and Kensington Fire CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-53,Version:1 Department. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-54 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/29/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-54 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street, on March 9, 2024 from 8:00 a.m. through 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of Rodeo Baseball Association Opening Day Parade, Rodeo area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to partially close a portion of Parker Avenue, on March 9, 2024, from 8:00 a.m. through 10:00 a.m., Rodeo area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street,on March 9,2024,from 8:00 a.m.through 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of Rodeo Baseball Association Opening Day Parade, Rodeo area. (District V) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: The Rodeo Baseball Association requested the road closure to use as a safe area to create a staging area for the start and finish of their event. The applicant shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c::Larry Gossett-Engineering Services,Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services,Bob Hendry,Engineering Services,Devon Patel,Engineering Services,Chris Lau, Maintenance, CHP, Sheriff- Patrol Division Commander CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-54,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street,on March 9,2024,from 8:00 a.m.through 10:00 a.m., for the purpose of Rodeo Baseball Association Opening Day Parade, Rodeo area. (District V) RC24-7 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Rodeo Baseball Association to fully close Parker Avenue between First Street and Seventh Street,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 9,2024 for the period of 8:00 a.m.through 10:00 a.m.,subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Rodeo Baseball Association shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Sheriff’s Office, the California Highway Patrol and the Fire District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-54,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-55 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-55 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road, on April 2, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Coventry Road, on April 2, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road,on April 2,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department.Pacific Gas and Electric Company has requested the road closure for traffic safety due to the narrow width of the road at the construction site. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-55,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road,on April 2,2024,from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-3 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close Coventry Road between Berkeley Park Boulevard and 324 Coventry Road,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on April 2,2024,for the period of 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the work area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District and the Kensington Fire Protection District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-55,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-56 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-56 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue, on March 1, 2024, from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Approve & Authorize to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue, on March 1, 2024, from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., Kensington area. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue,on March 1,2024,from 8:30 a.m.through 4:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department to maintain public safety.Pacific Gas and Electric Company is requesting to close a portion of Colgate Avenue for traffic safety due to the narrow roadway at the construction site. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities. c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry, Engineering Services, Marke Smith, Engineering Services, Devon Petal, Engineering Services, Chris Lau, Maintenance, Kensington Police Department & Fire Protection District CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-56,Version:1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director,or designee,to fully close a portion of Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue,on March 1,2024,from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area. (District I) RC24-4 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company to fully close Colgate Avenue between Kenyon Avenue and Columbia Avenue,except for emergency traffic,local residents,US Postal Service and garbage trucks,on March 1,2024,for the period of 8:30 a.m.through 4:30 p.m., subject to the following conditions: 1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the construction area and essential services will be allowed access as required. 2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 3.Pacific Gas and Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County. 4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance. 5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District and the Kensington Fire Protection District. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-57 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-57 accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. for the 2023 Countywide Pavement Digouts Project, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Bay Point, Pacheco, Contra Costa Centre, Kirker Pass, and Lafayette areas. (100% SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Funds) Attachments:1. Recordable Resolution_2025, 2. Signed Resolution 2024-57.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Notice of Completion for the 2023 Countywide Pavement Digouts Project, Bay Point, Pacheco, Contra Costa Centre, Kirker Pass, and Lafayette areas. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution accepting as complete the contracted work performed by Bay Cities Paving &Grading, Inc.for the 2023 Countywide Pavement Digouts Project,as recommended by the Public Works Director,Bay Point,Pacheco,Contra Costa Centre,Kirker Pass,and Lafayette areas.(County Project No.0672-6U2025), (District II, IV, V) FISCAL IMPACT: The Project was funded by 100% SB-1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Funds. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Director reports that said work has been inspected and complies with the approved plans, special provisions and standard specifications and recommends its acceptance as complete as of December 21, 2023. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The contractor will not be paid and acceptance notification will not be recorded. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-57,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-59 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/8/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-59 establishing a rate of $30 per Equivalent Runoff Unit for Stormwater Utility Area 17 (Unincorporated County) for Fiscal Year 2024–2025 and requesting that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District adopt annual parcel assessments for drainage maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Countywide. (100% Stormwater Utility Area 17 Funds) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer Report Title:Adopt Resolution Requesting that the Flood Control District Adopt Annual Parcel Assessments for the County’s Watershed Program. Project #7517-6W7091 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution establishing a rate of $30 per Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU)for Stormwater Utility Area 17 (Unincorporated County)for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and requesting that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FC District)adopt annual parcel assessments for drainage maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program, Countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: The 2024-2025 rate per ERU is the same as that set for fiscal year 2023-2024.Therefore,there will be no change in rate for Unincorporated County property owners.The unincorporated area of Contra Costa County will produce approximately $3,653,028 which will be used to implement the Unincorporated County’s Stormwater Program. All associated costs are funded 100% by Stormwater Utility Area 17 Funds. BACKGROUND: The Clean Water Program consists of the County,Contra Costa cities,and the FC District working together to prevent,reduce,or eliminate the discharge of pollutants into the storm drain system,including creeks and other natural waterways.The Clean Water Program was established in response to changes in the Federal Clean Water Act.The Clean Water permitting program is known as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)Program.To be in compliance with the current Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP),Clean Water Program participants implement stormwater programs to comply with the provisions outlined in the MRP.These stormwater programs are paid for with stormwater utility fee CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-59,Version:1 provisions outlined in the MRP.These stormwater programs are paid for with stormwater utility fee assessments. Adoption of the attached resolution will begin the annual process of assessment adoption. The Board of Supervisors is being asked to set a rate of $30 for one ERU in the Unincorporated County areas and to request that the FC District adopt the stormwater utility assessment.(The FC District is the only entity under state law with legal authority to assess this particular assessment.) The Public Works Department administers the County Stormwater Program.Examples of how the assessment is being spent in the current year include: 1.Work with County Building Inspection and Public Works inspectors and construction companies/contractors to reduce construction contaminants,such as paint,cement,oil/fuels,and soil erosion from entering storm drains and creeks. 2.Encourage Planners and the development community to use new designs that will reduce contaminated stormwater runoff. 3.Educate the public on the benefits of reducing pesticides and other toxic household product use and their proper disposal. 4.Educate County Engineers and Maintenance staff on flood control design,construction,and maintenance practices that protect water quality and preserve natural watershed habitats. 5.Inspect industrial and commercial businesses for evidence that spill prevention,equipment maintenance and cleaning,waste handling and disposal,and other business practices are done in a manner that minimizes stormwater contamination. 6. Educate marina operators and their marina users through a marina program. 7. Implement trash reduction control measures. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the rate per ERU is not set for the coming fiscal year,funds will not be available for the County’s Watershed Program to comply with the MRP.The San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board has the authority to issue fines of up to $10,000 per day against those municipalities that do not comply with the MRP and fail to implement the stormwater programs in compliance with the MRP provisions. cc:Laura Strobel, County Administrator’s Office, laura.strobel@cao.cccounty.us Thomas L. Geiger, County Counsel, tgeig@cc.cccounty.us Bob Campbell, County Auditor-Controller, bob.campbell@ac.cccounty.us Dorothy Lim, County Auditor-Controller’s Office, dorothy.lim@ac.cccounty.us Allison Knapp, Deputy Public Works Director, allison.knapp@pw.cccounty.us Tim Jensen, Flood Control, tim.jensen@pw.cccounty.us Michelle Cordis, Flood Control, michelle.cordis@pw.cccounty.us Michele Mancuso, County Watershed Program, Michele.Mancuso@pw.cccounty.us Jennifer Joel, County Watershed Program, Jennifer.Joel@pw.cccounty.us CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-59,Version:1 Jennifer Joel, County Watershed Program, Jennifer.Joel@pw.cccounty.us Rachelle Untal, Flood Control, Rachelle.Untal@pw.cccounty.us Catherine Windham, Flood Control, catherine.windham@pw.cccounty.us THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF:ESTABLISH the rate per Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU)for Stormwater Utility Area 17 (Unincorporated County)for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and request that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FC District)ADOPT an annual parcel assessment for drainage maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program, Countywide. The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES THAT; WHEREAS,under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,prescribed discharges of stormwater require a permit from the appropriate California regional water quality board under the NPDES Program; and WHEREAS,the COUNTY of CONTRA COSTA (County)did apply for,and did receive,an NPDES permit, which requires the implementation of selected Best Management Practices (BMPs)to minimize or eliminate pollutants from entering stormwaters; and WHEREAS,it is the intent of the County to utilize funds received from its Stormwater Utility Area (SUA)for implementation of the NPDES Program and drainage maintenance activities; and WHEREAS,at the request of the County,the FC District has completed the process for formation of an SUA, including the adoption of the Stormwater Utility Assessment Drainage Ordinance NO. 93-47; and WHEREAS,the SUA and Program Group Costs Payment agreement between the County and the FC District requires that the County determine the rate to be assessed to a single ERU for the forthcoming fiscal year in the Unincorporated County; and NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that the County Board of Supervisors does determine that the rate to be assigned to a single ERU for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 shall be set at $30. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the County Board of Supervisors does hereby request the FC District to adopt SUA 17 levies based on said amount. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0598 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:RECEIVE report concerning the final settlement of Cara Kerby vs. Contra Costa County; and AUTHORIZE payment from the Workers' Compensation Internal Service Fund in an amount not to exceed $65,000 as recommended by the Director of Risk Management. (100% Workers’ Compensation Internal Service Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Karen Caoile, Director of Risk Management Report Title:Final Settlement of Claim, Cara Kerby vs. Contra Costa County ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: RECEIVE this report concerning the final settlement of Cara Kerby and AUTHORIZE payment from the Workers' Compensation Internal Service Fund in an amount not to exceed $65,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Workers' Compensation Internal Service Fund payment of $65,000. BACKGROUND: Attorney Suzanne M. Aboujudom, defense counsel for the County, has advised the County Administrator that within authorization an agreement has been reached settling the workers' compensation claim of Cara Kerby vs. Contra Costa County. The Board's February 6, 2024, closed session vote was: Supervisors Gioia, Andersen, Burgis, Carlson and Glover - Yes. This action is taken so that the terms of this final settlement and the earlier February 6, 2024, closed session vote of this Board authorizing its negotiated settlement are known publicly. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Case will not be settled. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0598,Version:1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0599 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:DENY claims filed by Hoda Abdolrazek, Ziad Abunie, Antoine Rapheal Sr. Anderson, Robert Brock, Rebecca Garza, Anne Hancock, Ashika Kanji, Doraiswami Ramesh, Cristina Sales, Heir of Michael J. Wright, and Karen Lee Scott. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Monica Nino, County Administrator Report Title:Claims ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: DENY claims filed by Hoda Abdolrazek, Ziad Abunie, Antoine Rapheal Sr. Anderson, Robert Brock, Rebecca Garza, Anne Hancock, Ashika Kanji, Doraiswami Ramesh, Cristina Sales, Heir of Michael J. Wright, and Karen Lee Scott. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Hoda Abdolrazek: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and automobile accident in the amount of $1,000,000. Ziad Abunie: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and automobile accident in the amount of $1,000,000. Antoine Rapheal Sr. Anderson: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and bicycle accident in the amount of $100,000,000. Robert Brock: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and motorcycle accident in the amount of $5,000,000 plus. Rebecca Garza: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and trip and fall in the amount of $100,000,000. Anne Hancock: Fraud claim related to alleged illegal eviction in an undisclosed amount. Ashika Kanji: Personal injury claim related to motor vehicle accident in the amount of $1,000,000. Doraiswami Ramesh: Property claim for damage to vehicle in the amount of $6,130. Cristina Sales, Heir of Michael J. Wright: Wrongful death claim related to dangerous condition and motorcycle accident in the amount of $75,000,000. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0599,Version:1 Karen Lee Scott: Personal injury claim related to dangerous condition and bicycle accident in the amount of $250,000. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Not acting on the claims could extend the claimants’ time limits to file actions against the County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0600 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Sheriff's Deputy Vivian Eriksen to pay the County $1.00 for retired Sheriff’s Service Dog "Xena" on February 28, 2024. (No fiscal impact) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Transfer of K-9 Service Dog Xena ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Sheriff's Deputy Vivian Eriksen to pay the County $1.00 for retired Sheriff’s Service Dog "Xena" on February 28, 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: On December 18,2007,the Board of Supervisors approved Board Resolution No.2007/172,which authorized the transfer of ownership of retired police canine (K-9)service dogs to their respective handlers for minimal ($1.00)consideration.Police dogs typically reach the end of their useful service lives around the age of 8 years. Although the approximate costs of purchasing a police dog ($11,000)and training it ($8,000)are substantial, the service received from these dogs is well worth the expenditure.However,upon their retirement from service,the dogs cease being a financial “asset”and instead become a continuous expense.By transferring ownership of the dog to its handler,all ongoing expenses are absorbed by the handler in exchange for his/her dog’s companionship in the sunset years of the dog’s life. On rare occasions,the K-9 handler is unable to accept ownership of his/her retired service dog.In these situations,the Sheriff’s Office seeks authorization to transfer ownership of retired K-9’s to private citizens whom the Office of the Sheriff has determined to be suitable to accept the dog.In exchange for a minimal ($1.00)consideration for the transfer of ownership,the new owner will assume all costs - food, shelter, veterinary, licensing, and liability - for the dog. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0600,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0601 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Tek84, in an amount not to exceed $49,995, to service the Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner located at the Sheriff’s West County Detention Facility for the period February 8, 2024 to February 7, 2029. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to enter into a service agreement with Tek84, including modified indemnification and limitation of liability language, to provide service to the Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner located at the Sheriff’s West County Detention Facility, in an amount not to exceed $49,995, for the period of February 8, 2024 to February 7, 2029. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in up to $49,995 in contractual service expenditures over a five-year period and will be funded 100% by the Sheriff’s Office budgeted General Fund. BACKGROUND: The Tek94 Intercept Whole Body Scanner, which is currently located at the Sheriff’s West County Detention Facility, is used to keep contraband and dangerous drugs from entering the West County Detention Facility. This agreement will allow Tek84 to provide preventative maintenance, coverage for all repair parts, labor and shipping as needed, software system upgrades and a Radiation Safety Survey for the Tek84 Intercept Whole Body Scanner. The Terms and Conditions of this service agreement include an indemnification and limitation of liability provision approved by County Counsel. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0601,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not vote in favor, Tek84 will not be able to provide maintenance or repair to our Tek84 Whole Body Scanner, which is essential in keeping contraband and dangerous drugs from entering the West County Detention Facility. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0602 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $22,320, for the installation of automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-6 and hosted software system services, for the period March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2026. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc. ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc., including mutual indemnification, for the installation of automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-6 and provision of a hosted software system, in an amount not to exceed $22,320, for the term March 1, 2024, through February 28, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in up to $22,320 in contractual service expenditures over a 2-year period and will be funded by the County General Fund. BACKGROUND: Rekor Recognition Systems, Inc. provides automatic license plate reader cameras with 24/7 monitoring for homes, businesses and neighborhoods to protect against property crime, violent crime, stolen vehicles and more. In May of 2022, an opportunity to receive grant funding to purchase cameras for the East Contra Costa County Area (P-6) became available. This equipment is fundamental to maintaining the safety of Sheriff's Office personnel, civilians and suspects alike. In recent years, crime rates have risen compromising the safety and security of our communities, especially rural areas such as East Contra Costa County. Individuals often target these areas to commit various crimes such as theft, burglary and more violent crimes. East Contra Costa County is unique because it borders three other counties, including Sacramento County, San Joaquin County and Alameda County. This often makes East Contra Costa County vulnerable to individuals coming into the area and then returning to their respective counties to avoid detection and apprehension. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0602,Version:1 The lack of cameras in rural areas can make preventing or solving these crimes challenging for patrol deputies and investigators. The use of ALPR technology has become commonplace in many Bay Area communities, including several areas and cities in Contra Costa County. The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff would deploy additional fixed ALPRs in strategic areas of East Contra Costa County as a force multiplier and investigative tool to support law enforcement and security efforts with the community. The license plate information is then queried against various databases for wanted or stolen vehicles, missing and endangered persons and other categories. The installation of ALPR cameras would significantly increase our ability to prevent, respond to and solve crimes within all areas of Contra Costa County. Providing additional cameras would help enhance public safety by protecting the citizens of Contra Costa County and the greater Bay Area. Twelve (12) cameras were purchased with State Homeland Security Grant Program FY2020 funds. This service agreement is for the installation of the twelve (12) automatic license plate reader cameras in County Service Area P-6 and the provision of a hosted software system. This service agreement includes a mutual indemnification provision. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not approve, the twelve (12) ALPR cameras that were purchased with State Homeland Security Grant Program FY2020 funds will not be installed by Rekor and the Office of the Sheriff will not have access to their software system. We will also not have additional measures in place to deter and solve crime in East Contra Costa County. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0603 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute contracts with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Regents of the University of California, for use of the Sheriff's Range Facility for the period March 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (100% Participant fees) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Range Use Contract ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute contracts with the agencies specified below, including mutual indemnification as approved by County Counsel, for use of the Sheriff's Range Facility for the period March 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and the Regents of the University of California, on behalf of its San Francisco Campus’ Department of Police FISCAL IMPACT: There is no net county cost. This agreement will be 100% funded by participant fees. BACKGROUND: Local, state, and federal law enforcement officers are required to complete firearms qualifications on a regular basis. The Office of the Sheriff has a firing range and classroom that can be used by other law enforcement agencies for firearms qualifications when not in use by County staff. The recommended contracts provide for use of the Sheriff's Range Facilities, including firearms range and classroom, for firearms qualification of these government agencies' employees. The County Counsel's Office has approved the mutual indemnification language included in the contracts. The contract agencies will pay a per-day fee for access to the Sheriff's Range Facility. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0603,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Negative action on this request would mean a loss of revenue for the County and a valuable loss of services for outside agencies. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0604 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a license agreement with Comcast IP Phone, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 annually, to provide subscriber data for the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services Community Warning System, starting March 1, 2024, until the termination of the agreement by either party. (100% General Fund) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:Comcast IP Phone, LLC ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a license agreement with Comcast IP Phone, LLC, including modified indemnification and limitation of liability language, to provide subscriber data for the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services Community Warning System, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 annually, starting March 1, 2024, until the termination of the agreement by either party. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in up to $10,000 in contractual service expenditures annually and will be funded by the General Fund. BACKGROUND: This license agreement with Comcast IP Phone, LLC, is for access to subscriber data for the Community Warning System for emergency alert notification. Utilizing multiple data sources for contact information in emergency alert systems is essential for ensuring comprehensive coverage and effectiveness. By incorporating diverse channels, in addition to our Reverse 911 source, such as a Public Utility specialized registry, emergency alerts can reach a broader and more diverse audience, including individuals with varying communication preferences and accessibility needs. This approach provides redundancy, improves the accuracy of contact information, enhances resilience in adverse conditions, and increases the likelihood of reaching individuals even when traditional communication channels are disrupted or overloaded. Overall, leveraging CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0604,Version:1 multiple data sources strengthens the reliability, reach, and responsiveness of emergency alerting efforts, contributing to enhanced public safety and preparedness during emergencies. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board does not approve, the Office of the Sheriff Emergency Services Division will not be able to utilize another source of contact information, risking incomplete coverage in our emergency alert system. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 2024-58 Name: Status:Type:Consent Resolution Agenda Ready File created:In control:2/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-58 authorizing the Sheriff Coroner, or designee, to apply for, accept and approve grant funding, including amendments and extensions, with the California Highway Patrol Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for fiscal years 2024-2026, with an initial amount of $169,700 for the purchase of new equipment for the Sheriff’s Forensic Services Toxicology Unit, for the initial period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026. (No County match) Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To: Board of Supervisors From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner Report Title:California Highway Patrol Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program FY 2024-2026 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ADOPT Resolution authorizing the Sheriff Coroner, or designee, to apply for and accept and approve grant funding, including amendments and extensions, pursuant to the grant guidelines, with the California Highway Patrol Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for fiscal years 2024-2026, with an initial amount of $169,700 for the purchase of new equipment for the Sheriff’s Forensic Services Toxicology Unit, for the initial period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will result in an initial revenue of $169,700. There is no county match requirement for this grant. BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff, Forensic Services Division (FSD) will use monies from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program FY 2024-2026 to purchase a Biotage Extrahera, a fully automated sample preparation instrument, and replace aged equipment including three biohoods and a freezer. The FSD is an accredited crime laboratory providing toxicology services to more than 20 law enforcement agencies. These purchases will ensure more efficient processing and analysis of evidence samples in driving under the influence cases. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:RES 2024-58,Version:1 The purchase of an automated sample handling robot and the replacement of aged equipment are essential to ensuring continuity of laboratory operations. Without these grant purchases, there are increased risks of equipment failure and the inability to perform in-house testing. As a result, many requests for analysis will be sent to an outside laboratory. Analysis performed by an outside laboratory creates an increased prosecution burden and cost to Contra Costa County law enforcement agencies and the District Attorney’s Office. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board IN THE MATTER OF Applying for and Accepting a grant from the California Highway Patrol WHEREAS,the County of Contra Costa is seeking funds available through the California Highway Patrol for its Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors: Authorizes the Sheriff-Coroner, Undersheriff or the Sheriff's Chief of Management Services, to execute for and on behalf of the County of Contra Costa, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining State financial assistance including grant modifications and extensions provided by the California Highway Patrol. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:124-0605 Name: Status:Type:Consent Item Passed File created:In control:1/31/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On agenda:Final action:2/27/2024 2/27/2024 Title:ACCEPT the Treasurer's Quarterly Investment Report as of December 31, 2023, as recommended by the County Treasurer-Tax Collector. Attachments:1. Q4_2023 TOC_Final Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS2/27/2024 1 Pass To:Board of Supervisors From:Dan Mierzwa, Treasurer-Tax Collector Report Title:ADOPTION OF THE QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT AS OF 12/31/2023 ☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the Treasurer’s Quarterly Investment Report (the “Report”) as of December 31, 2023, as recommended by the County Treasurer-Tax Collector. FISCAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 53646 requires the County Treasurer to prepare quarterly reports to the Board of Supervisors describing County investments including type,par value,cost,and market value.Attached please find the report covering the period October 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023. As of December 31,2023,the par value,cost,and market value of Contra Costa County Investment Pool were $6,873,924,326.77,$6,832,825,416.54,and $6,785,695,673.07,respectively.The weighted yield to maturity was 4.72% and the weighted average days to maturity were 259 days. As of December 31,2023,The Treasurer’s investment portfolio was in compliance with Government Code 53600 et.seq.and with the Treasurer’s current investment policy.Historical activities combined with future cash flow projections indicate that the County should be able to meet its cash flow needs for the next six months. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:24-0605,Version:1 CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Department would be out of compliance with Government Code Section 53646. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 3/28/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER’S QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2023 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Executive Summary 1 II. Contra Costa County Investment Pool Summary 2 III. Appendix A. Investment Portfolio Detail—Managed by Treasurer’s Office 1. Portfolio Statement 6 B. Investment Portfolio Detail – Managed by Outside Contracted Parties 1. PFM 19 2. State of California Local Agency Investment Fund 26 3. Allspring Global Investments 28 4. CAMP 51 5. CalTRUST Liquidity* 6. US Bank 67 7. Other a. East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCS) 71 *No Treasury Pool assets were invested in the CalTRUST Liquidity fund during the quarter. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY •The Treasurer's investment portfolio is in compliance with Government Code 53600 et. seq.. •The Treasurer's investment portfolio is in compliance with the Treasurer's current investment policy. •The Treasurer’s investment portfolio has no securities lending, reverse repurchase agreements or derivatives. •As of 12/31/23, the fair value of the Treasurer’s investment portfolio was 99.31% of the cost. More than 77 percent of the portfolio or over $5.3 billion will mature in less than a year. Historical activities combined with future cash flow projections indicate that the County should be able to meet its cash flow needs for the next six months. •Treasurer’s Investment Portfolio Characteristics Par $6,873,924,326.77 Cost $6,832,825,416.54 Market Valuei $6,785,695,673.07 Weighted Yield to Maturity 4.72% Weighted Average Days to Maturity 259 days Weighted Duration 0.65 year Notes: 1.All reporting information is unaudited but due diligence was utilized in its preparation. The information in this report may be updated and is subject to change without notice. Changes will be reflected in the next report. 2.There may be minor differences between the investment pool summary pages and the attached statements and exhibits from time to time. The variances are largely due to rounding errors, the timing difference in recording and/or posting transactions, interests, security values, etc. 3.All securities and amounts reported are denominated in U.S. Dollars. i A rising rate market will produce unrealized losses in a fixed income portfolio. Mark-to-market losses in bond holdings are not realized losses, bonds are expected to mature at par. The opposite is true for a declining rate market. Page 1 PERCENT OF TYPE PAR VALUE COST FAIR VALUE 4 TOTAL COST A. Investments Managed by Treasurer's Office 1. U.S. Treasuries (STRIPS, Bills, Notes)$755,256,000.00 $747,257,292.37 $747,544,508.96 10.94% 2. U.S. Agencies Federal Home Loan Banks 1,120,117,000.00 1,111,057,308.58 1,100,128,594.56 16.26% Federal National Mortgage Association 364,400,000.00 362,898,851.24 356,401,584.60 5.31% Federal Farm Credit Banks 563,970,000.00 562,805,364.65 555,884,700.29 8.24% Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation 653,000,000.00 649,669,184.38 644,522,458.30 9.51% Subtotal 2,701,487,000.00 2,686,430,708.85 2,656,937,337.75 39.32% 3. Supranationals - International Government 588,000,000.00 584,948,898.03 575,669,654.67 8.56% 4. Money Market Instruments Commercial Paper 1,552,450,000.00 1,539,455,766.74 1,538,790,567.48 22.53% Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 175,000,000.00 175,000,000.00 175,083,715.00 2.56% Time Deposit 3,404.12 3,404.12 3,404.12 0.00% Subtotal 1,727,453,404.12 1,714,459,170.86 1,713,877,686.60 25.09% 5. Corporate Notes 171,445,000.00 170,661,344.28 162,257,690.31 2.50% TOTAL (Section A.)1 5,943,641,404.12 5,903,757,414.39 5,856,286,878.29 86.40% B. Investments Managed by Outside Contractors 1. PFM 77,246,529.93 76,826,050.18 76,468,913.94 1.12% 2. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)243,018,219.68 243,018,219.68 243,018,219.68 3.56% 3. Allspring Global Investments 44,636,239.69 43,841,798.94 44,539,727.81 2 0.64% 4. CAMP 487,574,429.35 487,574,429.35 487,574,429.35 7.14% 5. CalTRUST (Liquidity Fund)- - - 0.00% 6. US Bank (Federated Tax Free Cash Fund)11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 0.17% 7. Other a. EBRCS Bond 5 863,700.20 863,700.20 863,700.20 0.01% TOTAL (Section B.)865,243,710.06 864,028,789.56 864,369,582.19 12.65% C. Cash 65,039,212.59 65,039,212.59 65,039,212.59 0.95% 3GRAND TOTAL (FOR A , B, & C)$6,873,924,326.77 $6,832,825,416.54 $6,785,695,673.07 100.00% Notes: 1. Excludes funds managed by PFM retained by Contra Costa School Insurance Group and Community College District. 2. Base Market Value plus Accrued Interest. 3. Does not include the Futuris Public Entity Trust of the Contra Costa Community College District Retirement Board of Authority. 4. A rising rate market will produce unrealized losses in a fixed income portfolio. Mark-to-market losses in bond holdings are not realized losses, bonds are expected to mature at par. The opposite is true for a declining rate market. 5. East Bay Regional Communications System Authority Revenue Bond 2011 Series B maturing on June 1st 2027. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL December 31, 2023 Page 2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL - EARNING STATISTICS Fiscal Quarter Year To Date To Date Average Daily Balance ($)5,880,999,559.93 6,075,973,593.05 Net Earnings ($)131,556,788.45 69,852,656.62 Earned Income Yield 4.38%4.50% CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL - PORTFOLIO STATISTICS Investment Par Fair YTM WAM Percentage Type Value Value of ($)($)(%)(days)Portfolio U.S. Treasury 755,256,000.00 747,544,508.96 5.44 74 11.02% Agencies 2,701,487,000.00 2,656,937,337.75 4.35 425 39.15% Commercial Paper 1,552,450,000.00 1,538,790,567.48 5.54 56 22.68% NCD/YCD 175,000,000.00 175,083,715.00 5.68 87 2.58% Corporate Notes 171,445,000.00 162,257,690.31 1.85 683 2.39% Time Deposit 3,404.12 3,404.12 0.08 144 0.00% Supranationals 588,000,000.00 575,669,654.67 4.01 478 8.48% PFM 77,246,529.93 76,468,913.94 3.82 755 1.13% LAIF 243,018,219.68 243,018,219.68 3.81 4 1 3.58% CAMP 487,574,429.35 487,574,429.35 5.55 5 0 7.19% CalTRUST (Liquidity)- - 0.00 0 0.00% Allspring Global Investments 44,636,239.69 44,539,727.81 5.17 331 0.66% US Bank (Federated Tax Free)11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 3.87 0 0.18% Misc.1 863,700.20 863,700.20 N/A N/A 0.01% Cash 65,039,212.59 65,039,212.59 1.65 2 0 0.96% Total Fund3 6,873,924,326.77 6,785,695,673.07 4.72 259 100.00% 1. East Bay Regional Communications System Authority. 2. Average Earning Allowance of WFB for this quarter. 3. Excludes the Futuris Public Entity Trust of the CCCCD Retirment Board of Authority. 4. PMIA Quarter to Date yield. 5. Distribution Yield as of 12/31/23. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL December 31, 2023 Page 3 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL AT A GLANCE December 31, 2023 NOTES TO INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY AND AT A GLANCE: 1. All report information is unaudited but due diligence was utilized in its preparation. The information in the entire report is obtained at time of preparation hence may be updated after publishing and is subject to change without notice. Changes will be reflected in the next report. 2. There may be slight differences between the portfolio summary/at a glace pages and the attached statements/exhibits from time to time. The variances are largely due to rounding, the timing difference in recording and/or posting transactions, inerestes, security values, etc. 3. All securities and amounts included in the portfolio are denominated in United States Dollars. 4. The Contra Costa County investment portfolio maintains Standard & Poor's highest credit quality rating of AAAf and lowest volatility of S1+. The portfolio consists of a large portion of short-term investments with credit rating of A-1/P-1 or better. The majority of the long-term investments in the portfolio are rated AA or better. 5. In accordance with Contra Costa County's Investment Policy, the Treasurer's Office has constructed a portfolio that safeguards the principal, meets the liquidity needs and achieves a return. As a result, more than 77% of the portfolio will mature in less than a year with a weighted average maturity of 259 days. U.S. Treasuries 10.94% U.S.Agencies39.32% Supranationals8.56% Money Market25.09% Corporate Notes 2.50% PFM 1.12% LAIF3.56% Allspring 0.64%CAMP7.14% CalTRUST 0.00% US Bank 0.17% Other 0.01% Cash 0.95% PORTFOLIO BREAKDOWN BY INVESTMENT 77.54% 9.51%7.07%2.47%3.41% $0 $1,000,000,000 $2,000,000,000 $3,000,000,000 $4,000,000,000 $5,000,000,000 $6,000,000,000 1 yr & less 1 to 2 yrs 2 to 3 yrs 3 to 4 yrs 4+ yrs MATURITY DISTRIBUTION AAA 12.34%AA+ 23.28% AA 4.01% AA- 0.23% A+ 0.46%A 0.25% A- 0.13% A-1+ 56.15% A-1 2.02%NR (CASH) 0.95% NR (Misc.) 0.16% BBB+ 0.02% PORTFOLIO CREDIT QUALITY 4.72%4.73% 3.82%3.81% 5.17% 5.55% 3.87% 1.65% 4.61%4.59% 1.75% 3.93% 4.91% 5.70% 3.37% 1.65% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% Total Treasurer PFM LAIF Allspring CAMP US Bank Cash YTM AND INCOME YIELD YTM Income Yield Total consists of 87% Treasurer, 1% of PFM; 4% LAIF; 1% Allspring; and 7% of CAMP approximately. 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 3/21 6/21 9/21 12/21 3/22 6/22 9/22 12/22 3/23 6/23 9/23 12/23 QUARTERLY WEIGHTED YIELD TO MATURITY CCC Pool YTM SOFR Index County&Agencies 51.80% School Dist. 33.41% Community College Dist. 7.14% Voluntary Participants 7.64% POOL BALANCE BY PARTICIPANTS Note: School Dist. balace includes the bond proceeds. Page 4 Note: All data provided by Bloomberg. MAJOR MARKET AND ECONOMIC DATA AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2023 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12/03 12/05 12/07 12/09 12/11 12/13 12/15 12/17 12/19 12/21 12/23PercentageTREASURY YIELDS AND FED TARGET RATE US 2-YR TREASURY YIELD US 5-YR TREASURY YIELD FEDERAL FUND TARGET RATE -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 12/31/2312/31/2012/31/1712/31/1412/31/1112/31/0812/31/0512/31/02Percentage GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT GDP QoQ Change -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 Dec-23Dec-21Dec-19Dec-17Dec-15Dec-13Dec-11Dec-09Dec-07Dec-05Dec-03Dec-01Percentage CONSUMER PRICE INDEX CPI YoY Change Core CPI YoY Change 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Dec-04 Dec-06 Dec-08 Dec-10 Dec-12 Dec-14 Dec-16 Dec-18 Dec-20 Dec-22PercentageEMPLOYMENT RELATED RATES Unemployment Rate Underemployment Rate Page 5 SECTION III APPENDIX A. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL - MANAGED BY TREASURER’S OFFICE Notes: 1. Statements are generated by the SymPro Treasury Management Software system beginning first quarter of calendar year 2022. 2. Market pricing data are obtained from Interactive Data Corporation/ICE. YTM 365 Page 1 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Time Deposits 0.081WESTAMERICA BANK - TIME DEP86232 3,404.12 3,404.12 05/24/20240.08005/24/2021 3,404.12 N/A121101042B 144 3,404.123,404.123,404.123,404.12Subtotal and Average 0.081 144 Negotiable CDs 5.576TORONTO DOM NY - YCD91108 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 03/04/20245.50012/05/2023 35,003,045.00 A-1+89115BMZ0 63 5.607TORONTO DOM NY - YCD91114 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 03/05/20245.53012/06/2023 35,004,830.00 A-1+89115BN97 64 5.576TORONTO DOM NY - YCD91123 40,000,000.00 40,000,000.00 03/06/20245.50012/08/2023 40,003,240.00 A-1+89115BNR7 65 5.708WELLS FARGO BANK - NCD90962 30,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 03/11/20245.63009/11/2023 30,007,710.00 A-195001KPR9 70 5.931RBC NY - YCD90993 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 06/21/20245.85009/28/2023 35,064,890.00 A-1+78015JBB2 172 175,000,000.00175,083,715.00175,000,000.00210,000,000.00Subtotal and Average 5.676 87 Corporate Notes 0.566TOYOTA MCC - CORP86258 10,000,000.00 9,996,953.80 06/18/20240.50006/18/2021 9,768,260.00 A+89236TJH9 169 2.106BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP85315 5,500,000.00 5,499,749.32 10/24/20242.10010/24/2019 5,353,518.50 A06406RAL1 297 2.106BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP85316 4,500,000.00 4,499,794.90 10/24/20242.10010/24/2019 4,380,151.50 A06406RAL1 297 4.600MASS MUTUAL GLOBAL - CORP90545 12,000,000.00 11,807,620.61 01/11/20252.95001/13/2023 11,730,600.00 AA+57629WCG3 376 1.240GUARDIAN LIFE GLOB FUND - CORP86549 10,000,000.00 9,979,816.39 06/23/20251.10012/02/2021 9,436,370.00 AA+40139LAG8 539 1.079NEW YORK LIFE - CORP86281 10,000,000.00 9,954,540.51 01/15/20260.85007/01/2021 9,239,270.00 AA+64952WDW0 745 1.160NEW YORK LIFE - CORP86244 10,000,000.00 9,997,609.89 06/09/20261.15006/09/2021 9,160,770.00 AA+64952WED1 890 1.941MET LIFE GLOB FUND - CORP86587 10,000,000.00 9,988,717.86 01/11/20271.87501/14/2022 9,131,350.00 AA-59217GER6 1,106 5.186NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL - CORP90393 10,000,000.00 9,729,201.02 09/15/20274.35010/17/2022 9,858,910.00 AA+66815L2K4 1,353 81,454,004.3078,059,200.0082,000,000.0081,441,997.13Subtotal and Average 2.279 675 Commercial Paper Disc. -Amortizing 5.603METLIFE ST FDG - CP90911 35,000,000.00 34,952,750.00 01/10/20245.40008/11/2023 34,937,630.00 A-1+59157TAA1 9 5.542METLIFE ST FDG - CP90988 35,000,000.00 34,952,925.00 01/10/20245.38009/27/2023 34,937,630.00 A-1+59157TAA1 9 5.606TOYOTA MCC - CP90989 35,000,000.00 34,941,822.17 01/12/20245.44009/27/2023 34,927,550.00 A-1+89233GAC0 11 5.709MUFG BK LTD - CP91042 40,000,000.00 39,901,333.33 01/17/20245.55010/16/2023 39,887,160.00 A-162479LAH8 16 5.445KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91134 40,000,000.00 39,893,200.00 01/19/20245.34012/12/2023 39,875,840.00 A-1+50000DAK2 18 5.443KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91143 40,000,000.00 39,893,200.00 01/19/20245.34012/14/2023 39,875,840.00 A-1+50000DAK2 18 5.592TOYOTA MCC - CP91032 35,000,000.00 34,889,137.50 01/22/20245.43010/11/2023 34,875,400.00 A-1+89233GAN6 21 5.459MICROSOFT - CP91081 40,000,000.00 39,869,711.11 01/23/20245.33011/16/2023 39,853,160.00 A-1+59515MAP0 22 5.618MUFG BK LTD - CP91073 30,000,000.00 29,894,966.67 01/24/20245.48011/13/2023 29,884,320.00 A-162479LAQ8 23 5.694TOYOTA MCC - CP90965 35,000,000.00 34,871,666.67 01/25/20245.50009/12/2023 34,859,720.00 A-1+89233GAR7 24 5.510MICROSOFT - CP91044 40,000,000.00 39,827,611.11 01/30/20245.35010/17/2023 39,811,880.00 A-1+59515MAW5 29 5.578METLIFE ST FDG - CP91056 28,500,000.00 28,366,984.17 02/01/20245.42010/26/2023 28,356,702.00 A-1+59157TB10 31 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Report Ver. 7.3.11 Page 6 YTM 365 Page 2 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Commercial Paper Disc. -Amortizing 5.507MICROSOFT - CP91048 40,000,000.00 39,815,722.22 02/01/20245.35010/23/2023 39,800,120.00 A-1+59515MB12 31 5.579TOYOTA MCC - CP91050 40,000,000.00 39,813,311.11 02/01/20245.42010/24/2023 39,797,840.00 A-1+89233GB13 31 5.441KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91119 40,000,000.00 39,793,111.11 02/05/20245.32012/08/2023 39,773,560.00 A-1+50000DB54 35 5.442KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91120 30,000,000.00 29,840,400.00 02/06/20245.32012/08/2023 29,825,700.00 A-1+50000DB62 36 5.596METLIFE ST FDG - CP91052 40,000,000.00 39,764,700.00 02/09/20245.43010/25/2023 39,751,160.00 A-1+59157TB93 39 5.497MICROSOFT - CP91062 30,000,000.00 29,826,450.00 02/09/20245.34010/30/2023 29,814,720.00 A-1+59515MB95 39 5.478MICROSOFT - CP91077 30,000,000.00 29,809,008.33 02/13/20245.33011/14/2023 29,796,990.00 A-1+59515MBD6 43 5.487KOCH INDUSTRIES - CP91144 40,000,000.00 39,726,044.44 02/16/20245.36012/14/2023 39,707,840.00 A-1+50000DBG0 46 5.522MICROSOFT - CP91058 40,000,000.00 39,684,944.44 02/23/20245.35010/27/2023 39,669,840.00 A-1+59515MBP9 53 5.494MICROSOFT - CP91069 25,000,000.00 24,792,722.22 02/26/20245.33011/07/2023 24,782,475.00 A-1+59515MBS3 56 5.678TORONTO DOM - CP91063 25,000,000.00 24,782,291.67 02/27/20245.50010/31/2023 24,777,075.00 A-1+89116EBT9 57 5.526MICROSOFT - CP91059 35,000,000.00 34,698,319.45 02/28/20245.35010/27/2023 34,685,035.00 A-1+59515MBU8 58 5.628TOYOTA MCC - CP91066 30,000,000.00 29,727,500.00 03/01/20245.45011/02/2023 29,718,660.00 A-1+89233GC12 60 5.574METLIFE ST FDG - CP91090 30,000,000.00 29,706,958.34 03/06/20245.41011/21/2023 29,698,260.00 A-1+59157TC68 65 5.617METLIFE ST FDG - CP91071 25,000,000.00 24,750,666.67 03/07/20245.44011/08/2023 24,633,925.00 A-1+59157TC76 66 5.513MICROSOFT - CP91072 40,000,000.00 39,602,466.67 03/08/20245.34011/08/2023 39,586,240.00 A-1+59515MC86 67 5.527JOHNSON & JOHNSON - CP91068 35,000,000.00 34,635,902.78 03/11/20245.35011/07/2023 34,623,750.00 A-1+47816FCB5 70 5.447METLIFE ST FDG - CP91149 19,500,000.00 19,287,558.34 03/15/20245.30012/15/2023 19,278,168.00 A-1+59157TCF8 74 5.566TORONTO DOM - CP91155 40,000,000.00 39,536,288.89 03/18/20245.42012/19/2023 39,519,400.00 A-1+89116ECJ0 77 5.508RBC - CP91156 30,000,000.00 29,651,600.00 03/19/20245.36012/20/2023 29,651,600.00 A-1+78015CCK6 78 5.491MICROSOFT - CP91105 35,000,000.00 34,590,626.39 03/20/20245.33012/04/2023 34,574,925.00 A-1+59515MCL7 79 5.508RBC - CP91161 30,000,000.00 29,647,133.33 03/20/20245.36012/21/2023 29,647,133.33 A-1+78015CCL4 79 5.904JP MORGAN - CP90864 35,000,000.00 34,544,300.00 03/25/20245.58006/30/2023 34,541,395.00 A-146640PCR2 84 5.523MICROSOFT - CP91078 40,000,000.00 39,489,733.34 03/27/20245.34011/15/2023 39,472,040.00 A-1+59515MCT0 86 5.505MICROSOFT - CP91099 35,000,000.00 34,528,443.06 04/01/20245.33011/29/2023 34,512,800.00 A-1+59515MD10 91 5.456METLIFE ST FDG - CP91162 25,000,000.00 24,661,388.89 04/02/20245.30012/21/2023 24,650,400.00 A-1+59157TD26 92 5.489METLIFE ST FDG - CP91124 40,000,000.00 39,450,266.67 04/03/20245.32012/08/2023 39,434,960.00 A-1+59157TD34 93 5.508JOHNSON & JOHNSON - CP91084 26,450,000.00 26,059,495.10 04/10/20245.31511/16/2023 26,051,848.15 A-1+47816FDA6 100 5.483METLIFE ST FDG - CP91145 28,000,000.00 27,566,350.00 04/15/20245.31012/14/2023 27,557,516.00 A-1+59157TDF7 105 5.482METLIFE ST FDG - CP91150 40,000,000.00 39,380,500.00 04/15/20245.31012/15/2023 39,367,880.00 A-1+59157TDF7 105 5.516MICROSOFT - CP91137 40,000,000.00 39,377,000.00 04/15/20245.34012/12/2023 39,364,440.00 A-1+59515MDF9 105 5.470MICROSOFT - CP91157 40,000,000.00 39,364,000.00 04/18/20245.30012/20/2023 39,348,120.00 A-1+59515MDJ1 108 5.517METLIFE ST FDG - CP91141 40,000,000.00 39,295,255.55 04/29/20245.33012/13/2023 39,291,920.00 A-1+59157TDV2 119 1,539,455,766.741,538,790,567.481,552,450,000.001,393,025,131.28Subtotal and Average 5.539 56 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 7 YTM 365 Page 3 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Coupon Securities 4.842FHLB - AGENCY90547 10,000,000.00 9,999,554.53 01/19/20244.75001/19/2023 9,997,040.00 AA+3130AUM92 18 4.778FHLB - AGENCY90574 10,000,000.00 9,999,737.50 02/06/20244.75002/06/2023 9,991,840.00 AA+3130AUSH8 36 5.016FHLB - AGENCY90588 10,000,000.00 9,999,825.00 02/13/20245.00002/13/2023 9,994,010.00 AA+3130AUVK7 43 5.470FHLB - AGENCY90901 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 06/10/20245.47008/01/2023 35,017,605.00 AA+3130AWSB7 161 3.480FFCB - AGENCY90215 10,000,000.00 9,989,832.50 06/17/20243.25006/17/2022 9,930,360.00 AA+3133ENYX2 168 3.273FFCB - AGENCY90216 10,000,000.00 9,998,980.94 06/17/20243.25006/17/2022 9,930,360.00 AA+3133ENYX2 168 1.661FNMA - AGENCY85280 20,000,000.00 19,994,594.99 10/15/20241.62510/18/2019 19,490,400.00 AA+3135G0W66 288 1.661FNMA - AGENCY85281 10,000,000.00 9,997,297.50 10/15/20241.62510/18/2019 9,745,200.00 AA+3135G0W66 288 4.420FFCB - AGENCY90391 10,000,000.00 9,996,623.61 10/17/20244.37510/17/2022 9,951,290.00 AA+3133ENS43 290 5.250FHLB - AGENCY91092 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 11/22/20245.25011/22/2023 25,104,225.00 AA+3130AXWB0 326 4.385FFCB - AGENCY90512 10,000,000.00 9,987,591.11 12/20/20244.25012/20/2022 9,942,330.00 AA+3133EN4N7 354 4.385FFCB - AGENCY90513 10,000,000.00 9,987,600.81 12/20/20244.25012/20/2022 9,942,330.00 AA+3133EN4N7 354 4.315FFCB - AGENCY90514 10,000,000.00 9,993,989.44 12/20/20244.25012/20/2022 9,942,330.00 AA+3133EN4N7 354 1.027FHLB - AGENCY86558 10,000,000.00 9,997,429.44 12/20/20241.00012/22/2021 9,639,940.00 AA+3130AQF40 354 4.887FFCB - AGENCY90431 10,000,000.00 9,999,195.77 01/10/20254.87511/10/2022 10,031,080.00 AA+3133ENZ37 375 1.370FFCB - AGENCY86598 10,000,000.00 9,994,862.96 01/21/20251.32001/21/2022 9,670,350.00 AA+3133ENLU2 386 1.820FFCB - AGENCY90013 10,000,000.00 9,992,406.87 02/14/20251.75002/15/2022 9,695,400.00 AA+3133ENPG9 410 4.800FFCB - AGENCY90592 10,000,000.00 9,994,609.47 02/21/20254.75002/23/2023 10,019,430.00 AA+3133EPBH7 417 4.004FFCB - AGENCY90692 10,000,000.00 9,999,689.13 03/10/20254.00004/10/2023 9,938,800.00 AA+3133EPFL4 434 4.303FFCB - AGENCY90665 10,000,000.00 9,964,302.08 03/28/20254.00003/28/2023 9,941,050.00 AA+3133EPER2 452 2.750FFCB - AGENCY90138 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/25/20252.75004/25/2022 9,787,790.00 AA+3133ENVC1 480 4.666FHLB - AGENCY90840 10,000,000.00 9,994,518.21 06/06/20254.62506/12/2023 10,055,800.00 AA+3130AWER7 522 4.284FFCB - AGENCY90506 10,000,000.00 9,995,360.00 06/13/20254.25012/13/2022 9,958,210.00 AA+3133EN4B3 529 0.542FNMA - AGENCY85679 20,000,000.00 19,987,888.54 06/17/20250.50006/19/2020 18,872,700.00 AA+3135G04Z3 533 0.705FHLB - AGENCY86282 10,000,000.00 9,999,263.29 06/30/20250.70007/06/2021 9,461,540.00 AA+3130AN4A5 546 4.808FFCB - AGENCY90891 10,000,000.00 9,991,444.44 07/21/20254.75007/21/2023 10,025,530.00 AA+3133EPQN8 567 4.985FFCB - AGENCY90898 10,000,000.00 9,983,706.63 07/28/20254.87507/28/2023 10,061,200.00 AA+3133EPRS6 574 4.010FFCB - AGENCY90789 10,000,000.00 9,998,811.51 08/18/20254.00005/18/2023 9,928,110.00 AA+3133EPKA2 595 4.475FFCB - AGENCY90344 10,000,000.00 9,963,599.54 09/30/20254.25009/30/2022 9,972,230.00 AA+3133ENP95 638 5.152FFCB - AGENCY91031 10,000,000.00 9,995,562.50 10/10/20255.12510/10/2023 10,120,030.00 AA+3133EPYK5 648 5.245FFCB - AGENCY91046 10,000,000.00 9,991,276.54 10/10/20255.12510/18/2023 10,131,418.89 AA+3133EPYK5 648 0.573FNMA - AGENCY85911 10,000,000.00 9,986,717.10 11/07/20250.50011/12/2020 9,314,510.00 AA+3135G06G3 676 4.625FFCB - AGENCY91126 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/08/20254.62512/08/2023 10,054,390.00 AA+3133EPL37 707 4.747FFCB - AGENCY91132 10,000,000.00 9,981,495.73 12/08/20254.62512/11/2023 10,058,244.17 AA+3133EPL37 707 4.250FFCB - AGENCY90587 10,000,000.00 9,975,305.56 02/13/20264.12502/13/2023 9,983,650.00 AA+3133EPAQ8 774 4.764FFCB - AGENCY90627 10,000,000.00 9,997,176.33 03/09/20264.75003/09/2023 10,117,970.00 AA+3133EPCR4 798 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 8 YTM 365 Page 4 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Coupon Securities 4.715FFCB - AGENCY90879 10,000,000.00 9,981,514.47 04/10/20264.62507/12/2023 10,092,250.00 AA+3133EPPR0 830 3.857FFCB - AGENCY90724 10,000,000.00 9,977,166.67 04/13/20263.75004/13/2023 9,906,590.00 AA+3133EPFT7 833 4.088FFCB - AGENCY90803 10,000,000.00 9,980,297.22 05/26/20264.00005/26/2023 9,955,210.00 AA+3133EPKX2 876 4.572FFCB - AGENCY90875 10,000,000.00 9,954,163.43 07/06/20264.37507/06/2023 10,048,500.00 AA+3133EPPE9 917 4.793FFCB - AGENCY90963 10,000,000.00 9,994,415.66 07/08/20264.75009/11/2023 10,137,018.33 AA+3133EPVP7 919 4.551FFCB - AGENCY90914 10,000,000.00 9,987,601.30 08/14/20264.50008/14/2023 10,084,110.00 AA+3133EPSW6 956 4.683FFCB - AGENCY90915 10,000,000.00 9,955,644.07 08/14/20264.50008/14/2023 10,084,110.00 AA+3133EPSW6 956 4.739FFCB - AGENCY90918 10,000,000.00 9,943,568.81 08/14/20264.50008/15/2023 10,085,360.00 AA+3133EPSW6 956 4.205FFCB - AGENCY91163 10,000,000.00 9,977,856.08 12/22/20264.12512/22/2023 10,009,520.00 AA+3133EPQ73 1,086 4.021FFCB - AGENCY90666 10,000,000.00 9,993,762.56 03/29/20274.00003/29/2023 9,979,770.00 AA+3133EPEE1 1,183 3.990FFCB - AGENCY90761 10,000,000.00 9,964,979.86 04/26/20273.87504/26/2023 9,942,230.00 AA+3133EPGT6 1,211 4.125FFCB - AGENCY90386 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/14/20274.12510/14/2022 10,029,830.00 AA+3133ENS50 1,382 4.720FFCB - AGENCY91079 10,000,000.00 9,966,795.69 11/15/20274.62511/15/2023 10,224,200.00 AA+3133EPC60 1,414 3.533FFCB - AGENCY90718 10,000,000.00 9,987,072.72 04/12/20283.50004/12/2023 9,794,270.00 AA+3133EPFU4 1,563 4.361FFCB - AGENCY90904 8,970,000.00 8,653,789.58 08/09/20283.50008/02/2023 8,771,493.90 AA+3133EPJE6 1,682 4.665FFCB - AGENCY90982 10,000,000.00 9,931,204.00 09/22/20284.50009/22/2023 10,260,150.00 AA+3133EPWK7 1,726 4.936FFCB - AGENCY91065 10,000,000.00 9,974,093.33 11/01/20284.87511/01/2023 10,437,570.00 AA+3133EPA47 1,766 587,954,175.02585,660,875.29588,970,000.00592,091,786.13Subtotal and Average 3.965 634 Federal Agency Disc. -Amortizing 5.522FHLB - AGENCY DISC90979 35,000,000.00 34,994,856.94 01/02/20245.29009/21/2023 34,979,735.00 A-1+313384RG6 1 4.933FHLB - AGENCY DISC90745 4,500,000.00 4,497,665.00 01/05/20244.67004/19/2023 4,495,441.50 A-1+313384RK7 4 5.542FHLB - AGENCY DISC90899 4,690,000.00 4,674,268.96 01/24/20245.25007/28/2023 4,672,351.53 A-1+313384SE0 23 5.542FHLB - AGENCY DISC90900 2,500,000.00 2,491,614.58 01/24/20245.25007/28/2023 2,490,592.50 A-1+313384SE0 23 4.906FHLB - AGENCY DISC90551 6,000,000.00 5,981,580.00 01/25/20244.60501/25/2023 5,976,558.00 A-1+313384SF7 24 4.906FHLB - AGENCY DISC90552 5,000,000.00 4,984,650.00 01/25/20244.60501/25/2023 4,980,465.00 A-1+313384SF7 24 5.439FHLB - AGENCY DISC91040 35,000,000.00 34,856,266.67 01/29/20245.28010/13/2023 34,842,990.00 A-1+313384SK6 28 5.570FHLB - AGENCY DISC91038 35,000,000.00 34,844,541.67 01/31/20245.33010/12/2023 34,832,840.00 A-1+313384SM2 30 5.452FHLB - AGENCY DISC91102 35,000,000.00 34,811,145.83 02/07/20245.25011/30/2023 34,795,040.00 A-1+313384SU4 37 5.450FHLB - AGENCY DISC91057 40,000,000.00 39,753,133.33 02/12/20245.29010/27/2023 39,736,520.00 A-1+313384SZ3 42 5.377FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91087 30,000,000.00 29,808,050.00 02/14/20245.23511/17/2023 29,793,600.00 A-1+313396TB9 44 5.380FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91091 25,000,000.00 24,832,611.11 02/16/20245.24011/22/2023 24,820,675.00 A-1+313396TD5 46 5.430FNMA - AGENCY DISC91116 40,000,000.00 39,709,722.22 02/20/20245.22512/07/2023 39,689,640.00 A-1+313588TH8 50 5.350FFCB - AGENCY DISC91164 25,000,000.00 24,814,770.83 02/21/20245.23012/22/2023 24,802,375.00 A-1+313312TJ9 51 5.354FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91129 25,000,000.00 24,814,947.92 02/21/20245.22512/11/2023 24,802,375.00 A-1+313396TJ2 51 5.351FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91121 40,000,000.00 39,698,400.00 02/22/20245.22012/08/2023 39,677,960.00 A-1+313396TK9 52 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 9 YTM 365 Page 5 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Disc. -Amortizing 5.421FNMA - AGENCY DISC91122 40,000,000.00 39,698,688.89 02/22/20245.21512/08/2023 39,677,960.00 A-1+313588TK1 52 5.566FHLB - AGENCY DISC91055 40,000,000.00 39,658,444.44 02/28/20245.30010/26/2023 39,642,800.00 A-1+313384TR0 58 5.634FHLB - AGENCY DISC90958 9,954,000.00 9,859,857.28 03/05/20245.32009/07/2023 9,858,312.20 A-1+313384TX7 64 5.490FHLB - AGENCY DISC91095 40,000,000.00 39,586,227.78 03/12/20245.24511/28/2023 39,575,320.00 A-1+313384UE7 71 5.459FNMA - AGENCY DISC91109 35,000,000.00 34,634,600.00 03/13/20245.22012/05/2023 34,623,400.00 A-1+313588UF0 72 5.418FHLB - AGENCY DISC91165 5,000,000.00 4,943,775.00 03/19/20245.19012/22/2023 4,941,895.00 A-1+313384UM9 78 5.418FHLB - AGENCY DISC91166 36,000,000.00 35,595,180.00 03/19/20245.19012/22/2023 35,581,644.00 A-1+313384UM9 78 5.459FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91110 35,000,000.00 34,604,529.17 03/19/20245.21512/05/2023 34,593,265.00 A-1+313396UM3 78 5.298FHLB - AGENCY DISC91130 25,000,000.00 24,710,000.00 03/21/20245.22012/11/2023 24,702,300.00 A-1+313384UP2 80 5.503FHLB - AGENCY DISC91082 40,000,000.00 39,493,950.00 03/28/20245.23511/16/2023 39,483,520.00 A-1+313384UW7 87 5.387FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91083 40,000,000.00 39,490,577.78 03/29/20245.21011/16/2023 39,477,760.00 A-1+313396UX9 88 5.349FNMA - AGENCY DISC91117 35,000,000.00 34,526,148.61 04/04/20245.18512/07/2023 34,516,685.00 A-1+313588VD4 94 5.507FHLB - AGENCY DISC91097 40,000,000.00 39,429,422.22 04/08/20245.24011/28/2023 39,424,880.00 A-1+313384VH9 98 5.418FHLB - AGENCY DISC91098 40,000,000.00 39,423,600.00 04/09/20245.24011/28/2023 39,419,160.00 A-1+313384VJ5 99 5.345FHLB - AGENCY DISC91169 35,000,000.00 34,490,370.83 04/11/20245.19012/26/2023 34,481,790.00 A-1+313384VL0 101 5.287FHLB - AGENCY DISC90800 4,073,000.00 4,014,136.67 04/15/20244.95505/25/2023 4,010,377.63 A-1+313384VQ9 105 5.467FHLB - AGENCY DISC91125 40,000,000.00 39,392,750.00 04/15/20245.20512/08/2023 39,385,000.00 A-1+313384VQ9 105 5.466FHLB - AGENCY DISC91131 40,000,000.00 39,386,966.67 04/16/20245.20512/11/2023 39,379,320.00 A-1+313384VR7 106 5.415FHLB - AGENCY DISC91147 40,000,000.00 39,392,266.67 04/16/20245.16012/14/2023 39,379,320.00 A-1+313384VR7 106 5.383FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91093 45,000,000.00 44,304,500.00 04/17/20245.20011/27/2023 44,295,300.00 A-1+313396VS9 107 5.367FHLB - AGENCY DISC91168 25,000,000.00 24,606,010.42 04/19/20245.20512/26/2023 24,601,400.00 A-1+313384VU0 109 5.456FHLB - AGENCY DISC91138 40,000,000.00 39,336,833.33 04/25/20245.19012/12/2023 39,328,040.00 A-1+313384WA3 115 5.413FHLB - AGENCY DISC91170 40,000,000.00 39,334,933.34 04/26/20245.16012/27/2023 39,322,360.00 A-1+313384WB1 116 5.359FHLMC - AGENCY DISC91142 40,000,000.00 39,309,333.34 04/30/20245.18012/13/2023 39,299,600.00 A-1+313396WF6 120 5.317FHLB - AGENCY DISC91171 40,000,000.00 39,307,611.11 05/01/20245.15012/27/2023 39,304,240.00 A-1+313384WG0 121 5.297FHLB - AGENCY DISC90850 2,500,000.00 2,444,488.54 06/10/20244.96506/16/2023 2,442,372.50 A-1+313384XY0 161 5.427FHLB - AGENCY DISC90888 5,000,000.00 4,870,433.33 07/03/20245.07007/20/2023 4,871,255.00 A-1+313384YX1 184 1,231,413,860.481,231,008,434.861,245,217,000.001,209,903,022.70Subtotal and Average 5.421 77 Treasury Coupon Securities 2.661US TREASURY NOTES90183 1,500,000.00 1,499,229.72 04/30/20242.50005/19/2022 1,486,288.50 AA+91282CEK3 120 2.661US TREASURY NOTES90184 2,500,000.00 2,498,716.20 04/30/20242.50005/19/2022 2,477,147.50 AA+91282CEK3 120 1.261US TREASURY NOTES86597 2,500,000.00 2,496,527.38 01/15/20251.12501/21/2022 2,408,260.00 AA+91282CDS7 380 6,494,473.306,371,696.006,500,000.006,494,079.47Subtotal and Average 2.123 220 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 10 YTM 365 Page 6 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Treasury Bills 5.526US TREASURY BILLS90980 35,000,000.00 34,994,866.67 01/02/20245.28009/21/2023 35,000,000.00 A-1+912797HX8 1 5.520US TREASURY BILLS91045 35,000,000.00 34,994,852.08 01/02/20245.29510/18/2023 35,000,000.00 A-1+912797HX8 1 5.428US TREASURY BILLS91118 40,000,000.00 39,953,413.33 01/09/20245.24112/08/2023 39,959,200.00 A-1+912797HY6 8 5.569US TREASURY BILLS91037 35,000,000.00 34,948,180.55 01/11/20245.33010/12/2023 34,954,255.00 A-1+912797GC5 10 5.563US TREASURY BILLS91039 35,000,000.00 34,948,229.17 01/11/20245.32510/13/2023 34,954,255.00 A-1+912797GC5 10 5.452US TREASURY BILLS91128 40,000,000.00 39,900,644.44 01/18/20245.26012/11/2023 39,906,120.00 A-1+912797GD3 17 5.499US TREASURY BILLS91053 5,000,000.00 4,983,912.50 01/23/20245.26510/25/2023 4,984,635.00 A-1+912797JA6 22 5.034US TREASURY BILLS90589 2,900,000.00 2,890,855.33 01/25/20244.73002/15/2023 2,890,229.90 A-1+912796ZY8 24 4.701US TREASURY BILLS90729 85,000.00 84,747.83 01/25/20244.45004/18/2023 84,713.64 A-1+912796ZY8 24 4.701US TREASURY BILLS90736 5,000,000.00 4,985,166.67 01/25/20244.45004/18/2023 4,983,155.00 A-1+912796ZY8 24 4.701US TREASURY BILLS90737 3,000,000.00 2,991,100.00 01/25/20244.45004/18/2023 2,989,893.00 A-1+912796ZY8 24 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91060 25,000,000.00 24,911,583.33 01/25/20245.30510/27/2023 24,915,775.00 A-1+912796ZY8 24 5.557US TREASURY BILLS91041 35,000,000.00 34,850,428.47 01/30/20245.30510/13/2023 34,855,905.00 A-1+912797JB4 29 5.457US TREASURY BILLS91103 35,000,000.00 34,806,411.11 02/08/20245.24011/30/2023 34,810,440.00 A-1+912797GM3 38 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91111 7,700,000.00 7,651,898.53 02/13/20245.23012/06/2023 7,652,583.40 A-1+912797JD0 43 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91112 2,700,000.00 2,683,133.25 02/13/20245.23012/06/2023 2,683,373.40 A-1+912797JD0 43 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91113 2,500,000.00 2,484,382.64 02/13/20245.23012/06/2023 2,484,605.00 A-1+912797JD0 43 5.478US TREASURY BILLS91085 40,000,000.00 39,737,750.00 02/15/20245.24511/17/2023 39,743,760.00 A-1+912797GN1 45 5.399US TREASURY BILLS91159 2,388,000.00 2,372,492.92 02/15/20245.19512/20/2023 2,372,702.47 A-1+912797GN1 45 5.399US TREASURY BILLS91160 612,000.00 608,025.83 02/15/20245.19512/20/2023 608,079.53 A-1+912797GN1 45 4.744US TREASURY BILLS90728 375,000.00 372,573.33 02/22/20244.48004/18/2023 372,212.25 A-1+912796Z28 52 4.766US TREASURY BILLS90743 5,000,000.00 4,967,500.00 02/22/20244.50004/19/2023 4,962,830.00 A-1+912796Z28 52 5.547US TREASURY BILLS91061 30,000,000.00 29,740,154.17 02/29/20245.28510/30/2023 29,745,570.00 A-1+912797GP6 59 5.468US TREASURY BILLS91104 8,500,000.00 8,427,073.54 02/29/20245.23512/01/2023 8,427,911.50 A-1+912797GP6 59 5.472US TREASURY BILLS91086 30,000,000.00 29,721,333.33 03/05/20245.22511/17/2023 29,727,150.00 A-1+912797JG3 64 5.447US TREASURY BILLS91152 30,000,000.00 29,682,754.17 03/14/20245.21512/15/2023 29,688,690.00 A-1+912797GX9 73 5.447US TREASURY BILLS91153 24,000,000.00 23,746,203.33 03/14/20245.21512/15/2023 23,750,952.00 A-1+912797GX9 73 4.802US TREASURY BILLS90727 296,000.00 293,033.42 03/21/20244.51004/18/2023 292,627.67 A-1+912797LL9 80 4.802US TREASURY BILLS90734 4,000,000.00 3,959,911.11 03/21/20244.51004/18/2023 3,954,428.00 A-1+912797LL9 80 4.802US TREASURY BILLS90735 3,500,000.00 3,464,922.22 03/21/20244.51004/18/2023 3,460,124.50 A-1+912797LL9 80 5.425US TREASURY BILLS91167 3,000,000.00 2,965,366.67 03/21/20245.19512/22/2023 2,965,821.00 A-1+912797LL9 80 5.458US TREASURY BILLS91115 35,000,000.00 34,569,451.39 03/26/20245.21012/06/2023 34,575,030.00 A-1+912797JK4 85 5.499US TREASURY BILLS91136 40,000,000.00 39,423,270.00 04/09/20245.24312/12/2023 39,434,200.00 A-1+912797JM0 99 5.441US TREASURY BILLS91172 20,000,000.00 19,674,183.33 04/23/20245.19012/29/2023 19,676,540.00 A-1+912797JP3 113 5.495US TREASURY BILLS91075 3,500,000.00 3,434,846.04 05/09/20245.19511/14/2023 3,436,058.50 A-1+912797HQ3 129 5.495US TREASURY BILLS91076 6,000,000.00 5,888,307.50 05/09/20245.19511/14/2023 5,890,386.00 A-1+912797HQ3 129 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 11 YTM 365 Page 7 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Treasury Bills 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91100 950,000.00 930,565.90 05/23/20245.15011/29/2023 930,889.80 A-1+912797HR1 143 5.446US TREASURY BILLS91101 350,000.00 342,840.07 05/23/20245.15011/29/2023 342,959.40 A-1+912797HR1 143 5.381US TREASURY BILLS91158 12,400,000.00 12,112,471.56 06/13/20245.09012/20/2023 12,116,412.00 A-1+912797FS1 164 5.527US TREASURY BILLS90999 250,000.00 241,104.72 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 241,877.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91000 2,500,000.00 2,411,047.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 2,418,770.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91001 7,000,000.00 6,750,932.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 6,772,556.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91002 30,000,000.00 28,932,566.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 29,025,240.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91003 12,500,000.00 12,055,236.11 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 12,093,850.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91004 200,000.00 192,883.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 193,501.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91005 300,000.00 289,325.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 290,252.40 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91006 200,000.00 192,883.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 193,501.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91007 2,000,000.00 1,928,837.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 1,935,016.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91008 350,000.00 337,546.61 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 338,627.80 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91009 7,000,000.00 6,750,932.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 6,772,556.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91010 500,000.00 482,209.45 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 483,754.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91011 7,000,000.00 6,750,932.22 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 6,772,556.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91012 250,000.00 241,104.72 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 241,877.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91013 2,700,000.00 2,603,931.00 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 2,612,271.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91014 9,000,000.00 8,679,769.99 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 8,707,572.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91015 10,000,000.00 9,644,188.88 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 9,675,080.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91016 1,500,000.00 1,446,628.34 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 1,451,262.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91017 4,200,000.00 4,050,559.33 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 4,063,533.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91018 600,000.00 578,651.33 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 580,504.80 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91019 300,000.00 289,325.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 290,252.40 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91020 300,000.00 289,325.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 290,252.40 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91021 1,500,000.00 1,446,628.34 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 1,451,262.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91022 1,000,000.00 964,418.89 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 967,508.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91023 900,000.00 867,977.00 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 870,757.20 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91024 250,000.00 241,104.72 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 241,877.00 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91025 2,100,000.00 2,025,279.67 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 2,031,766.80 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91026 200,000.00 192,883.78 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 193,501.60 A-1+912797GL5 248 5.527US TREASURY BILLS91027 400,000.00 385,767.56 09/05/20245.16510/02/2023 387,003.20 A-1+912797GL5 248 740,762,819.07741,172,812.96748,756,000.00764,596,190.48Subtotal and Average 5.472 73 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 12 YTM 365 Page 8 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Callables 5.125FHLB - AGENCY90759 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/26/20245.12504/26/2023 9,998,300.00 AA+3130AVR87 25 5.000FNMA - AGENCY90559 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/26/20245.00001/26/2023 9,996,470.00 AA+3135GADZ1 25 5.000FNMA - AGENCY90693 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/10/20245.00004/10/2023 9,989,330.00 AA+3135GAGF2 100 5.000FNMA - AGENCY90723 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/12/20245.00004/13/2023 9,989,410.00 AA+3135GAGN5 102 5.125FNMA - AGENCY90760 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/26/20245.12504/26/2023 9,994,150.00 AA+3135GAGV7 116 5.200FHLMC - AGENCY90788 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/17/20245.20005/17/2023 9,980,920.00 AA+3134GYS60 168 0.500FHLMC - AGENCY85683 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 06/24/20240.50006/24/2020 19,560,200.00 AA+3134GVV96 175 5.330FNMA - AGENCY90858 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/28/20245.33006/28/2023 10,002,010.00 AA+3135GAHX2 179 5.400FNMA - AGENCY90887 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/19/20245.40007/19/2023 9,991,570.00 AA+3135GAJA0 200 3.320FHLB - AGENCY90261 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20243.32007/26/2022 9,901,310.00 AA+3130ASN47 207 3.570FHLB - AGENCY90267 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20243.57007/28/2022 9,915,080.00 AA+3130ASQR3 207 5.600FNMA - AGENCY90894 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20245.60007/26/2023 9,982,150.00 AA+3135GAJH5 207 4.800FNMA - AGENCY90566 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/30/20244.80001/30/2023 9,977,660.00 AA+3135GAEH0 211 4.050FHLMC - AGENCY90327 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/20/20244.05009/20/2022 9,924,140.00 AA+3134GX2E3 263 2.175FHLMC - AGENCY90098 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/27/20242.20003/28/2022 9,794,110.00 AA+3134GXPZ1 270 5.005FHLMC - AGENCY90519 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/27/20245.00012/27/2022 10,000,910.00 AA+3134GYA69 270 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86586 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/18/20241.00001/18/2022 9,706,380.00 AA+3130AQG64 291 5.080FHLMC - AGENCY90409 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/25/20245.08010/28/2022 9,983,690.00 AA+3134GX4M3 298 5.005FHLMC - AGENCY90568 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/30/20245.00001/30/2023 10,002,580.00 AA+3134GYDB5 303 1.200FHLB - AGENCY86559 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/23/20241.20012/23/2021 9,646,510.00 AA+3130AQBP7 357 0.956FHLB - AGENCY86574 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/30/20241.15012/30/2021 9,636,780.00 AA+3130AQ5X7 364 4.770FHLMC - AGENCY90567 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/30/20254.77001/30/2023 9,970,240.00 AA+3134GYFD9 395 4.800FHLMC - AGENCY90573 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/06/20254.80002/06/2023 9,971,390.00 AA+3134GYGH9 402 5.020FHLB - AGENCY90586 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/13/20255.02002/13/2023 9,994,730.00 AA+3130AUUQ5 409 2.190FFCB - AGENCY90078 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 03/21/20252.19003/21/2022 9,686,300.00 AA+3133ENSK7 445 3.100FHLMC - AGENCY90148 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/29/20253.10004/29/2022 9,784,360.00 AA+3134GXRS5 484 3.250FHLMC - AGENCY90226 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/27/20253.25006/29/2022 9,834,570.00 AA+3134GXXS8 543 0.700FFCB - AGENCY85691 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 06/30/20250.70006/30/2020 18,853,300.00 AA+3133ELQ49 546 0.650FNMA - AGENCY85693 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 06/30/20250.65006/30/2020 18,923,920.00 AA+3136G4XK4 546 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY90897 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/25/20255.50007/28/2023 9,991,440.00 AA+3134GYX31 571 0.750FHLB - AGENCY86191 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/29/20250.75004/29/2021 9,437,450.00 AA+3130AM4P4 575 5.504FHLMC - AGENCY90454 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/25/20255.50011/25/2022 9,974,960.00 AA+3134GY2W1 602 0.650FNMA - AGENCY85756 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/27/20250.65008/27/2020 9,402,510.00 AA+3136G4S87 604 4.665FNMA - AGENCY90581 4,400,000.00 4,363,193.39 08/28/20254.12502/08/2023 4,377,159.60 AA+3135G06V0 605 0.550FFCB - AGENCY85783 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/16/20250.55009/16/2020 9,361,540.00 AA+3133EL7K4 624 0.554FFCB - AGENCY85800 10,000,000.00 9,999,313.23 09/16/20250.55009/25/2020 9,361,540.00 AA+3133EL7K4 624 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 13 YTM 365 Page 9 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Callables 0.500FHLMC - AGENCY85866 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/29/20250.50009/29/2020 9,339,820.00 AA+3134GWVC7 637 0.550FHLMC - AGENCY85795 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/30/20250.55009/30/2020 9,347,100.00 AA+3134GWWT9 638 0.500FHLMC - AGENCY85805 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/30/20250.50009/30/2020 9,338,800.00 AA+3134GWUE4 638 0.600FHLMC - AGENCY85860 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/28/20250.60010/28/2020 9,317,410.00 AA+3134GW3Z7 666 0.600FNMA - AGENCY85871 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/29/20250.60010/29/2020 9,316,400.00 AA+3136G46N8 667 0.574FFCB - AGENCY85874 10,000,000.00 9,993,931.67 11/03/20250.54011/03/2020 9,300,110.00 AA+3133EMFR8 672 0.640FHLMC - AGENCY85928 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 11/24/20250.64011/24/2020 9,296,230.00 AA+3134GXEJ9 693 0.650FHLMC - AGENCY85937 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 11/26/20250.65011/30/2020 9,296,040.00 AA+3134GXFA7 695 0.650FNMA - AGENCY85989 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/17/20250.65012/17/2020 9,272,910.00 AA+3135G06K4 716 0.640FNMA - AGENCY86001 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/30/20250.64012/30/2020 9,258,140.00 AA+3135G06Q1 729 0.580FHLB - AGENCY86065 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/11/20260.58002/11/2021 9,243,750.00 AA+3130AKXB7 772 1.050FFCB - AGENCY86128 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 03/25/20261.05003/25/2021 9,297,970.00 AA+3133EMUK6 814 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86175 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/22/20261.00004/22/2021 9,295,840.00 AA+3130ALX25 842 1.100FHLB - AGENCY86176 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 04/22/20261.10004/22/2021 9,294,880.00 AA+3130ALXV1 842 1.050FHLB - AGENCY86246 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/10/20261.05006/10/2021 9,243,530.00 AA+3130AMMY5 891 0.900FFCB - AGENCY86252 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/15/20260.90006/15/2021 9,204,890.00 AA+3133EMH21 896 4.750FHLMC - AGENCY90511 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 06/18/20264.75012/20/2022 14,938,665.00 AA+3134GY6L1 899 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY90865 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/26/20265.50006/30/2023 9,988,170.00 AA+3134GYVD1 907 0.910FFCB - AGENCY86278 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/30/20260.91006/30/2021 9,194,410.00 AA+3133EMP22 911 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86276 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/30/20261.00006/30/2021 9,215,470.00 AA+3130AMYJ5 911 1.000FHLB - AGENCY86279 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/30/20261.00006/30/2021 9,215,470.00 AA+3130AN2Z2 911 5.375FNMA - AGENCY90877 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/10/20265.37507/10/2023 9,997,300.00 AA+3135GAJ69 921 1.250FHLB - AGENCY86442 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/28/20261.25010/28/2021 9,185,010.00 AA+3130APDQ5 1,031 1.500FHLB - AGENCY86511 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/02/20261.50012/02/2021 9,225,230.00 AA+3130APW43 1,066 1.600FFCB - AGENCY86538 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/14/20261.60012/14/2021 9,244,320.00 AA+3133ENHC7 1,078 1.600FFCB - AGENCY86550 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/14/20261.60012/16/2021 9,244,320.00 AA+3133ENHC7 1,078 1.750FHLB - AGENCY86603 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/28/20271.75001/28/2022 9,292,360.00 AA+3130AQJH7 1,123 1.853FFCB - AGENCY86604 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/08/20271.86002/08/2022 9,315,990.00 AA+3133ENNG1 1,134 2.000FHLB - AGENCY86605 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/25/20272.00002/25/2022 9,346,980.00 AA+3130AQRH8 1,151 2.770FHLB - AGENCY90041 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 03/04/20272.77003/04/2022 9,572,080.00 AA+3130AR2H3 1,158 3.375FHLB - AGENCY90146 9,900,000.00 9,900,000.00 04/28/20273.37504/28/2022 9,653,024.70 AA+3130ARPD7 1,213 5.300FHLMC - AGENCY90845 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/14/20275.30006/14/2023 9,962,140.00 AA+3134GYTW2 1,260 4.800FHLMC - AGENCY90517 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 06/21/20274.80012/21/2022 14,925,225.00 AA+3134GY6M9 1,267 5.000FHLB - AGENCY90340 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 09/14/20275.00009/28/2022 9,908,590.00 AA+3130AT3P0 1,352 5.106FHLMC - AGENCY90600 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/28/20285.10002/28/2023 9,972,980.00 AA+3134GYHZ8 1,519 5.200FHLMC - AGENCY90805 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 05/30/20285.20005/30/2023 9,971,330.00 AA+3134GYTE2 1,611 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 14 YTM 365 Page 10 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Federal Agency Callables 5.452FHLMC - AGENCY91034 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/11/20285.45010/11/2023 10,076,710.00 AA+3134H1EK5 1,653 5.430FFCB - AGENCY90883 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/14/20285.43007/14/2023 10,041,570.00 AA+3133EPPV1 1,656 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY90895 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 07/26/20285.50007/26/2023 9,971,380.00 AA+3134GYXM9 1,668 5.630FHLMC - AGENCY90896 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 07/26/20285.63007/26/2023 14,977,680.00 AA+3134GYY97 1,668 6.000FHLMC - AGENCY90913 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/14/20286.00008/14/2023 9,981,750.00 AA+3134GYYY2 1,687 6.162FHLMC - AGENCY90932 10,000,000.00 9,995,341.67 08/28/20286.15008/28/2023 10,007,980.00 AA+3134GYZ96 1,701 5.250FHLMC - AGENCY90970 10,000,000.00 9,897,520.06 09/18/20285.00009/18/2023 10,021,080.00 AA+3134H1CF8 1,722 5.875FHLMC - AGENCY90996 8,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 09/27/20285.87509/29/2023 8,008,600.00 AA+3134H1ER0 1,731 5.750FHLMC - AGENCY91033 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/11/20285.75010/11/2023 10,032,583.30 AA+3134H1FG3 1,745 5.500FHLMC - AGENCY91047 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10/20/20285.50010/20/2023 10,239,240.00 AA+3134H1HN6 1,754 4.950FHLMC - AGENCY91133 10,000,000.00 9,913,373.33 12/11/20284.75012/11/2023 9,977,500.00 AA+3134H1LJ0 1,806 867,062,673.35840,268,027.60867,300,000.00865,798,100.78Subtotal and Average 3.071 783 Corporate Note Callables 1.850TOYOTA MCC - CORP85501 13,150,000.00 13,143,010.34 02/13/20251.80002/13/2020 12,718,601.10 A+89236TGT6 409 0.765JOHNSON & JOHNS - CORP86327 15,295,000.00 15,241,133.09 09/01/20250.55008/12/2021 14,328,937.21 AAA478160CN2 609 4.616WALMART INC - CORP90341 11,000,000.00 10,876,839.85 09/09/20253.90009/29/2022 10,890,682.00 AA931142EW9 617 0.712APPLE INC - CORP86060 10,000,000.00 9,997,527.13 02/08/20260.70002/08/2021 9,261,690.00 AA+037833EB2 769 0.726APPLE INC - CORP86061 10,000,000.00 9,994,616.89 02/08/20260.70002/08/2021 9,261,690.00 AA+037833EB2 769 0.758APPLE INC - CORP86289 10,000,000.00 9,988,031.79 02/08/20260.70002/18/2021 9,261,690.00 AA+037833EB2 769 1.066AMAZON - CORP86223 10,000,000.00 9,984,776.56 05/12/20261.00005/12/2021 9,237,600.00 AA023135BX3 862 1.081AMAZON - CORP86224 5,000,000.00 4,990,704.75 05/12/20261.00005/13/2021 4,618,800.00 AA023135BX3 862 1.081AMAZON - CORP86226 5,000,000.00 4,990,699.58 05/12/20261.00005/14/2021 4,618,800.00 AA023135BX3 862 89,207,339.9884,198,490.3189,445,000.0089,202,068.62Subtotal and Average 1.452 691 Supranationals 2.353IBRD - SUPRA90099 10,000,000.00 9,997,576.60 03/28/20242.25003/30/2022 9,925,380.00 AAA45906M3C3 87 5.402IADB - SUPRA90903 10,000,000.00 9,924,198.88 07/01/20243.25008/02/2023 9,930,276.11 AAA4581X0EE4 182 4.704IFC - SUPRA90455 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 08/28/20244.70011/28/2022 9,950,520.00 AAA45950VRL2 240 0.447IFC - SUPRA86352 10,000,000.00 9,998,824.17 09/10/20240.43009/10/2021 9,657,190.00 AAA45950VQE9 253 4.687IFC - SUPRA90398 10,000,000.00 9,995,234.68 10/24/20244.62510/24/2022 9,956,820.00 AAA45950VRJ7 297 0.930IADB - SUPRA86499 10,000,000.00 9,999,088.89 11/29/20240.92011/29/2021 9,654,910.00 AAA45818WDK9 333 1.465IADB - SUPRA90006 10,000,000.00 9,992,976.86 02/10/20251.40002/10/2022 9,654,690.00 AAA45818WDQ6 406 0.655IFC - SUPRA86377 10,000,000.00 9,993,711.10 02/28/20250.60009/28/2021 9,523,350.00 AAA45950VQJ8 424 3.018IADB - SUPRA90149 10,000,000.00 9,997,787.04 04/29/20253.00004/29/2022 9,782,630.00 AAA45818WDN3 484 2.697IADB - SUPRA90199 10,000,000.00 9,993,600.00 06/03/20252.65006/03/2022 9,723,150.00 AAA45818WEB8 519 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 15 YTM 365 Page 11 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Supranationals 3.350IFC - SUPRA90307 10,000,000.00 9,996,887.00 08/25/20253.33008/25/2022 9,789,150.00 AAA45950VRG3 602 5.170IFC - SUPRA90509 10,000,000.00 9,995,047.75 10/17/20254.25012/13/2022 9,882,610.00 AAA45950VRP3 655 0.752IBRD - SUPRA86228 10,000,000.00 9,954,790.19 10/28/20250.50005/18/2021 9,319,380.00 AAA459058JL8 666 4.140IFC - SUPRA90518 10,000,000.00 9,983,442.92 12/22/20254.05012/22/2022 9,857,410.00 AAA45950VRQ1 721 4.866IFC - SUPRA90921 10,000,000.00 9,990,618.35 01/07/20264.55008/17/2023 10,053,785.56 AAA45950VSG2 737 0.580IFC - SUPRA86017 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 01/15/20260.58001/15/2021 9,234,530.00 AAA45950VPJ9 745 0.505IFC - SUPRA86039 15,000,000.00 14,983,097.83 02/05/20260.45002/05/2021 13,795,200.00 AAA45950VPL4 766 0.650IADB - SUPRA86079 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 02/20/20260.65002/24/2021 9,302,050.00 AAA45818WCZ7 781 0.914IADB - SUPRA86101 10,000,000.00 9,975,815.65 03/04/20260.80003/11/2021 9,313,620.00 AAA45818WDA1 793 0.969IADB - SUPRA86172 10,000,000.00 9,978,906.56 04/20/20260.87504/20/2021 9,271,130.00 AAA4581X0DV7 840 0.893IADB - SUPRA86188 10,000,000.00 9,995,975.28 04/20/20260.87504/28/2021 9,271,130.00 AAA4581X0DV7 840 0.900IFC - SUPRA86225 13,000,000.00 12,987,980.76 05/14/20260.86005/14/2021 11,940,058.00 AAA45950VPX8 864 0.818IADB - SUPRA86254 10,000,000.00 9,995,668.44 06/17/20260.80006/17/2021 9,205,990.00 AAA45818WDH6 898 4.540IADB - SUPRA90640 10,000,000.00 9,989,196.21 03/10/20274.50003/10/2023 10,095,990.00 AAA45818WEN2 1,164 4.035IADB - SUPRA90543 10,000,000.00 9,987,505.28 01/12/20284.00001/12/2023 9,982,220.00 AAA4581X0EH7 1,472 4.340IADB - SUPRA90847 10,000,000.00 9,984,405.56 06/15/20284.30006/15/2023 10,004,950.00 AAA45818WEP7 1,627 4.436IADB - SUPRA90848 10,000,000.00 9,946,533.33 06/15/20284.30006/15/2023 10,004,950.00 AAA45818WEP7 1,627 4.510IFC - SUPRA91094 10,000,000.00 9,995,653.68 11/27/20284.50011/27/2023 10,223,020.00 AAA45950VSM9 1,792 287,634,523.01278,306,089.67288,000,000.00287,620,045.85Subtotal and Average 2.543 745 Supranationals Callables 5.000IBRD - SUPRA90521 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12/27/20275.00012/27/2022 10,000,000.00 AAA45906M3M1 1,456 4.500IBRD - SUPRA90853 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 06/26/20284.50006/26/2023 10,069,470.00 AAA45906M4E8 1,638 5.779IBRD - SUPRA90995 10,000,000.00 9,988,138.89 09/29/20285.75009/29/2023 10,044,390.00 AAA45906M4H1 1,733 29,988,138.8930,113,860.0030,000,000.0029,988,041.44Subtotal and Average 5.093 1,609 Supranational Discounts 5.404IBRD - SUPRA DISC91064 25,000,000.00 24,989,000.00 01/04/20245.28011/01/2023 24,978,300.00 A-1+459052RJ7 3 5.516IBRD - SUPRA DISC91043 20,000,000.00 19,979,388.89 01/08/20245.30010/17/2023 19,971,060.00 A-1+459052RN8 7 5.554IBRD - SUPRA DISC91029 35,000,000.00 34,922,416.67 01/16/20245.32010/04/2023 34,908,825.00 A-1+459052RW8 15 5.483IBRD - SUPRA DISC91089 30,000,000.00 29,681,841.67 03/14/20245.23011/20/2023 29,672,880.00 A-1+459052UG9 73 5.479IBRD - SUPRA DISC91096 40,000,000.00 39,552,544.45 03/18/20245.23011/28/2023 39,540,880.00 A-1+459052UL8 77 5.381IADB - SUPRA DISC91135 40,000,000.00 39,460,600.00 04/03/20245.22012/12/2023 39,453,320.00 A-1+45818KVC3 93 5.458IBRD - SUPRA DISC91146 40,000,000.00 39,387,555.56 04/16/20245.20012/14/2023 39,379,320.00 A-1+459052VR4 106 5.459IBRD - SUPRA DISC91154 40,000,000.00 39,352,888.89 04/22/20245.20012/18/2023 39,345,120.00 A-1+459052VX1 112 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 16 YTM 365 Page 12 Par Value Book Value Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 267,326,236.13267,249,705.00270,000,000.00263,806,139.70Subtotal and Average 5.465 68 5,793,970,007.70 5,943,641,404.12 4.729 2885,856,286,878.29 5,903,757,414.39Total and Average Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 17 YTM 365 Page 13 Par Value Book Value Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Cash Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management Investment Portfolio -Treasury Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 0.00 5,793,970,007.70 5,943,641,404.12 4.729 288 0Average Balance 5,856,286,878.29 5,903,757,414.39Total Cash and Investments Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_001: 01/18/2024 12:46 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 12:46 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 18 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES B.1. PFM Notes: 1. Statements are generated by the SymPro Treasury Management Software system beginning first quarter of calendar year 2022. 2. Market pricing data are obtained from Interactive Data Corporation/ICE. YTM 365 Page 1 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Negotiable CDs 5.688NATIXIS NY BRANCH - YCD90974 550,000.00 550,000.00 09/18/20265.61009/20/2023 560,115.05 A63873QP65 991 550,000.00560,115.05550,000.00550,000.00Subtotal and Average 5.688 991 Corporate Notes 5.088AUST & NZ BANKING GRP - CORP90490 310,000.00 310,000.00 12/08/20255.08812/08/2022 311,864.96 AA-05254JAA8 707 5.079COMMONWLTH BK AUSTR NY - CORP90535 535,000.00 535,000.00 01/10/20255.07901/10/2023 535,516.81 AA-20271RAQ3 375 5.316COMMONWLTH BK AUSTR NY - CORP90642 350,000.00 350,000.00 03/13/20265.31603/13/2023 355,247.90 AA-20271RAR1 802 1.480COOPERATIVE RABOBANK - CORP86583 325,000.00 324,659.58 01/10/20251.37501/12/2022 312,610.68 A+21688AAS1 375 3.899COOPERATIVE RABOBANK - CORP90303 255,000.00 254,962.37 08/22/20243.87508/22/2022 252,465.56 A+21688AAU6 234 3.046GOLDMAN SACHS GRP - CORP90066 175,000.00 174,983.99 03/15/20243.00003/15/2022 174,012.83 BBB+38141GZP2 74 3.752HSBC USA INC - CORP90186 550,000.00 549,995.63 05/24/20243.75005/24/2022 545,862.35 A-40428HTA0 144 0.492JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP86245 185,000.00 184,966.50 06/07/20240.45006/10/2021 181,045.26 A24422EVQ9 158 1.266JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP86581 110,000.00 109,982.34 01/10/20251.25001/10/2022 106,098.19 A24422EVY2 375 3.408JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP90200 170,000.00 169,981.36 06/06/20253.40006/06/2022 167,115.61 A24422EWF2 522 4.771JOHN DEERE CAPITAL - CORP90835 190,000.00 189,910.51 06/08/20264.75006/08/2023 191,275.09 N/A24422EWX3 889 3.500NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BK - CORP90205 400,000.00 400,000.00 06/09/20253.50006/09/2022 393,142.40 AA-63254ABD9 525 4.966NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BK - CORP90538 480,000.00 480,000.00 01/12/20264.96601/12/2023 483,323.52 AA-63253QAA2 742 0.518PACCAR FINANCIAL - CORP86307 105,000.00 104,988.55 08/09/20240.50008/09/2021 101,914.58 A+69371RR40 221 2.859PACCAR FINANCIAL - CORP90115 300,000.00 299,967.07 04/07/20252.85004/07/2022 293,160.60 A+69371RR73 462 4.474PACCAR FINANCIAL - CORP90670 150,000.00 149,924.72 03/30/20264.45003/30/2023 149,725.95 A+69371RS49 819 5.080RABOBANK - CORP90889 500,000.00 500,000.00 07/17/20265.08007/20/2023 506,367.00 N/A21684LGS5 928 2.532TOYOTA MCC - CORP90080 100,000.00 99,993.03 03/22/20242.50003/22/2022 99,346.20 A+89236TJX4 81 4.823TOYOTA MCC - CORP90539 300,000.00 299,933.70 01/10/20254.80001/12/2023 300,069.00 A+89236TKN4 375 4.471TOYOTA MCC - CORP90792 190,000.00 189,912.55 05/18/20264.45005/18/2023 189,688.40 A+89236TKT1 868 5.113WELLS FARGO & COMPANY - CORP90669 325,000.00 310,491.43 04/22/20263.00003/30/2023 311,314.90 BBB+949746RW3 842 5,989,653.335,961,167.796,005,000.005,989,375.80Subtotal and Average 4.004 528 CD Medium Term 4.135CREDIT AG NY - MT CD90302 550,000.00 550,000.00 08/16/20244.10008/19/2022 544,018.20 A+22536AZR8 228 5.530NORDEA BANK ABP NY - MT CD90421 725,000.00 725,000.00 11/03/20255.53011/03/2022 733,641.28 AA-65558UYF3 672 5.678TORONTO DOM NY - MT CD90413 725,000.00 725,000.00 10/27/20255.60010/31/2022 734,284.35 AA-89115B6K1 665 2,000,000.002,011,943.832,000,000.002,000,000.00Subtotal and Average 5.200 547 Treasury Coupon Securities 0.427US TREASURY NOTES86242 300,000.00 302,917.09 11/30/20241.50006/07/2021 290,976.60 AA+912828YV6 334 1.823US TREASURY NOTES90012 1,150,000.00 1,145,957.03 02/15/20251.50002/15/2022 1,109,794.85 AA+91282CDZ1 411 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Report Ver. 7.3.11 Page 19 YTM 365 Page 2 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Treasury Coupon Securities 2.132US TREASURY NOTES90076 800,000.00 796,460.49 03/15/20251.75003/18/2022 773,031.20 AA+91282CED9 439 2.658US TREASURY NOTES90107 275,000.00 267,045.51 04/30/20250.37504/06/2022 260,240.20 AA+912828ZL7 485 2.940US TREASURY NOTES90151 800,000.00 774,095.33 04/30/20250.37505/06/2022 757,062.40 AA+912828ZL7 485 3.000US TREASURY NOTES90153 1,250,000.00 1,248,024.72 04/30/20252.87505/05/2022 1,222,705.00 AA+9128284M9 485 2.858US TREASURY NOTES90201 2,200,000.00 2,196,879.37 05/15/20252.75006/06/2022 2,147,921.60 AA+91282CEQ0 500 2.921US TREASURY NOTES90241 750,000.00 749,520.21 06/15/20252.87507/11/2022 733,008.00 AA+91282CEU1 531 3.060US TREASURY NOTES90269 800,000.00 799,296.79 07/15/20253.00008/08/2022 782,531.20 AA+91282CEY3 561 3.544US TREASURY NOTES90316 1,400,000.00 1,391,018.49 08/18/20253.12509/07/2022 1,372,109.20 AA+91282CFE6 595 4.138US TREASURY NOTES90492 725,000.00 729,567.46 11/15/20254.50012/08/2022 727,435.28 AA+91282CFW6 684 4.051US TREASURY NOTES90507 350,000.00 352,740.68 11/15/20254.50012/13/2022 351,175.65 AA+91282CFW6 684 4.089US TREASURY NOTES90527 130,000.00 130,120.87 12/15/20254.00012/29/2022 129,504.24 AA+91282CGA3 714 3.917US TREASURY NOTES90571 1,425,000.00 1,423,845.93 01/15/20263.87502/02/2023 1,414,145.78 AA+91282CGE5 745 4.083US TREASURY NOTES90584 800,000.00 796,826.27 01/15/20263.87502/09/2023 793,906.40 AA+91282CGE5 745 4.640US TREASURY NOTES90621 1,000,000.00 987,407.35 02/15/20264.00003/07/2023 995,430.00 AA+91282CGL9 776 3.865US TREASURY NOTES90751 280,000.00 279,311.05 04/15/20263.75004/24/2023 277,396.84 AA+91282CGV7 835 3.868US TREASURY NOTES90770 1,475,000.00 1,434,033.18 02/28/20262.50005/03/2023 1,423,490.05 AA+9128286F2 789 3.781US TREASURY NOTES90791 750,000.00 749,493.71 04/15/20263.75005/18/2023 743,027.25 AA+91282CGV7 835 4.048US TREASURY NOTES90795 1,425,000.00 1,423,573.13 02/15/20264.00005/23/2023 1,418,487.75 AA+91282CGL9 776 3.985US TREASURY NOTES90827 1,825,000.00 1,810,429.84 05/15/20263.62506/05/2023 1,803,826.35 AA+91282CHB0 865 4.278US TREASURY NOTES90841 1,600,000.00 1,581,933.16 04/15/20263.75006/13/2023 1,585,124.80 AA+91282CGV7 835 4.375US TREASURY NOTES90866 1,250,000.00 1,242,876.97 06/15/20264.12506/30/2023 1,237,451.18 AA+91282CHH7 896 4.776US TREASURY NOTES90867 750,000.00 744,716.54 05/31/20254.25006/30/2023 747,246.00 AA+91282CHD6 516 4.555US TREASURY NOTES90871 75,000.00 73,464.94 05/15/20263.62507/05/2023 74,129.85 AA+91282CHB0 865 4.568US TREASURY NOTES90907 1,475,000.00 1,476,049.10 07/15/20264.50008/03/2023 1,492,140.05 AA+91282CHM6 926 4.581US TREASURY NOTES90908 1,000,000.00 1,000,529.48 07/15/20264.50008/04/2023 1,011,742.65 AA+91282CHM6 926 4.461US TREASURY NOTES90912 150,000.00 150,627.20 07/15/20264.50008/11/2023 151,889.79 AA+91282CHM6 926 4.732US TREASURY NOTES90961 575,000.00 571,859.00 08/15/20264.37509/11/2023 580,709.13 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.705US TREASURY NOTES90964 1,250,000.00 1,244,141.51 08/15/20264.37509/12/2023 1,262,559.76 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.723US TREASURY NOTES90968 1,250,000.00 1,244,032.58 08/15/20264.37509/15/2023 1,263,005.58 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.712US TREASURY NOTES90972 625,000.00 622,469.74 08/15/20264.37509/19/2023 631,800.00 AA+91282CHU8 957 4.893US TREASURY NOTES91030 1,250,000.00 1,244,792.41 09/15/20264.62510/05/2023 1,270,607.76 AA+91282CHY0 988 4.728US TREASURY NOTES91074 1,000,000.00 1,000,609.70 10/15/20264.62511/10/2023 1,018,129.52 AA+91282CJC6 1,018 4.846US TREASURY NOTES91080 1,500,000.00 1,491,251.36 11/15/20264.62511/15/2023 1,523,671.50 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 4.311US TREASURY NOTES91127 1,850,000.00 1,871,556.33 11/15/20264.62512/11/2023 1,885,306.46 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 4.507US TREASURY NOTES91139 1,700,000.00 1,711,110.35 11/15/20264.62512/12/2023 1,732,659.77 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 4.426US TREASURY NOTES91151 750,000.00 756,808.52 11/15/20264.62512/15/2023 764,694.61 AA+91282CJK8 1,049 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 20 YTM 365 Page 3 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 37,817,393.3937,760,074.2537,960,000.0037,274,957.98Subtotal and Average 3.965 791 Corporate Note Callables 3.056AMAZON - CORP90132 145,000.00 144,901.38 04/13/20253.00004/13/2022 141,871.05 AA023135CE4 468 1.143AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP86485 325,000.00 327,514.70 07/30/20242.50011/23/2021 319,268.95 BBB+025816CG2 211 1.143AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP86486 100,000.00 100,773.75 07/30/20242.50011/23/2021 98,236.60 BBB+025816CG2 211 1.530BANK OF AMERICA - CORP86513 500,000.00 500,000.00 12/06/20251.53012/06/2021 480,674.50 A-06051GKE8 705 5.526BANK OF AMERICA - CORP90924 350,000.00 350,000.00 08/18/20265.52608/18/2023 356,460.65 A+06428CAA2 960 0.872BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP86433 355,000.00 354,937.18 10/25/20240.85010/25/2021 342,741.14 A06406RAX5 298 0.646CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP86353 370,000.00 369,882.48 09/13/20240.60009/14/2021 358,192.93 A14913R2P1 256 4.809CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP90533 175,000.00 174,970.63 01/06/20264.80001/06/2023 175,999.78 A14913R3B1 736 3.458CINTAS CORP - CORP90150 160,000.00 159,984.33 05/01/20253.45005/03/2022 157,128.00 A-17252MAP5 486 0.981CITIBANK NA - CORP86192 160,000.00 160,000.00 05/01/20250.98105/04/2021 157,284.64 BBB+172967MX6 486 5.864CITIBANK NA - CORP90998 255,000.00 255,000.00 09/29/20255.86409/29/2023 259,213.88 A+17325FBA5 637 5.488CITIBANK NA - CORP91106 250,000.00 250,000.00 12/04/20265.48812/04/2023 254,499.50 A+17325FBC1 1,068 2.014CITIGROUP INC - CORP86599 85,000.00 85,000.00 01/25/20262.01401/25/2022 81,677.61 BBB+17327CAN3 755 5.260COMCAST - CORP90423 100,000.00 99,983.35 11/07/20255.25011/07/2022 101,057.80 A-20030NDZ1 676 3.132COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP90273 120,000.00 119,940.63 08/15/20253.10008/09/2022 117,366.24 AA+194162AM5 592 4.842COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP90601 185,000.00 184,844.96 03/02/20264.80003/01/2023 187,333.59 AA-194162AQ6 791 4.370EXXON MOBIL - CORP90570 550,000.00 535,344.43 03/01/20263.04302/01/2023 534,089.60 AA-30231GAT9 790 2.760HOME DEPOT - CORP90103 60,000.00 59,955.59 04/15/20252.70003/28/2022 58,519.20 A437076CM2 470 3.997HOME DEPOT - CORP90322 75,000.00 74,984.59 09/15/20254.00009/19/2022 74,305.35 A437076CR1 623 5.037HOME DEPOT - CORP91107 155,000.00 154,669.57 09/30/20264.95012/04/2023 157,220.22 A437076CV2 1,003 0.773AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP86351 100,000.00 99,986.30 08/09/20240.75009/09/2021 97,207.40 A-02665WDY4 221 1.527AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP86590 300,000.00 299,918.37 01/13/20251.50001/13/2022 289,433.40 A-02665WEA5 378 5.295AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP90876 155,000.00 154,840.07 07/07/20265.25007/07/2023 157,948.10 A-02665WEK3 918 4.859HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL - CORP90417 325,000.00 324,976.95 11/01/20244.85011/02/2022 323,864.12 A438516CH7 305 4.000IBM - CORP90265 540,000.00 540,000.00 07/27/20254.00007/27/2022 534,032.46 A-459200KS9 573 4.600INTEL CORP-CORP90554 375,000.00 370,022.92 07/29/20253.70001/26/2023 369,043.50 A+458140AS9 575 0.563JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP86067 245,000.00 245,000.00 02/16/20250.56302/16/2021 243,357.52 A-46647PBY1 412 0.824JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP86236 190,000.00 190,000.00 06/01/20250.82406/01/2021 185,931.72 A-46647PCH7 517 2.595JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP90031 400,000.00 400,000.00 02/24/20252.59502/24/2022 387,369.60 A-46647PCV6 420 4.080JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP90140 225,000.00 225,000.00 04/26/20264.08004/26/2022 221,339.25 A-46647PCZ7 846 4.739LINDE INC CT - CORP90481 530,000.00 529,632.18 12/05/20254.70012/05/2022 530,429.30 A53522KAB9 704 5.055LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP90399 120,000.00 119,794.35 10/15/20254.95010/24/2022 120,935.52 A-539830BU2 653 2.630MORGAN STANLEY - CORP90018 450,000.00 450,000.00 02/18/20262.63002/18/2022 435,519.00 BBB+61747YEM3 779 0.373NATIONAL RURAL - CORP86059 140,000.00 139,996.69 02/08/20240.35002/08/2021 139,242.18 A-63743HEU2 38 1.876NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90002 105,000.00 104,998.84 02/07/20251.87502/07/2022 101,359.13 A-63743HFC1 403 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 21 YTM 365 Page 4 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Corporate Note Callables 3.458NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90152 70,000.00 69,991.17 06/15/20253.45005/04/2022 68,540.71 A-63743HFE7 531 5.499NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90415 70,000.00 69,942.76 10/30/20255.45010/31/2022 70,700.77 A-63743HFF4 668 4.473NATIONAL RURAL - CORP90585 60,000.00 59,969.71 03/13/20264.45002/09/2023 59,909.10 A-63743HFH0 802 5.612NATIONAL RURAL - CORP91067 115,000.00 114,961.93 11/13/20265.60011/02/2023 118,008.17 A-63743HFK3 1,047 4.759PEPSICO INC - CORP90534 300,000.00 294,560.63 07/17/20253.50001/09/2023 295,123.20 A+713448CY2 563 4.571PEPSICO INC - CORP90590 225,000.00 224,907.75 02/13/20264.55002/15/2023 225,899.33 A+713448FQ6 774 5.671PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP90411 240,000.00 240,000.00 10/28/20255.67110/28/2022 239,877.36 A-693475BH7 666 4.758PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP90548 45,000.00 45,000.00 01/26/20274.75801/24/2023 44,645.63 A-693475BL8 1,121 0.767CHARLES SCHWAB - CORP86114 245,000.00 244,991.27 03/18/20240.75003/18/2021 242,483.61 A808513BN4 77 1.746STATE STREET CORP - CORP86606 150,000.00 150,000.00 02/06/20261.74602/07/2022 144,136.80 A857477BR3 767 2.129STATE STREET CORP - CORP90001 75,000.00 76,239.10 03/30/20262.90102/07/2022 72,868.95 A857477BM4 819 2.383STATE STREET CORP - CORP90028 400,000.00 404,407.35 03/30/20262.90102/22/2022 388,634.40 A857477BM4 819 5.751STATE STREET CORP - CORP90422 105,000.00 105,000.00 11/04/20265.75111/04/2022 106,621.62 A857477BX0 1,038 4.857STATE STREET CORP - CORP90557 45,000.00 45,000.00 01/26/20264.85701/26/2023 44,786.84 A857477BZ5 756 1.041TARGET CORP - CORP86498 250,000.00 253,024.46 07/01/20243.50011/29/2021 247,814.25 A87612EBD7 182 4.260TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP90266 235,000.00 235,000.00 07/28/20264.26007/28/2022 230,120.93 A-89788MAH5 939 5.900TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP90412 250,000.00 250,000.00 10/28/20265.90010/28/2022 252,054.25 A-89788MAJ1 1,031 0.585UNITED HEALTH - CORP86229 260,000.00 259,966.33 05/15/20240.55005/19/2021 255,302.58 A+91324PEB4 135 5.150UNITED HEALTH - CORP90410 80,000.00 79,995.65 10/15/20255.15010/28/2022 80,872.40 A+91324PEN8 653 0.626UNILEVER CAPITAL - CORP86325 125,000.00 125,000.00 08/12/20240.62608/12/2021 121,372.75 A+904764BN6 224 3.925WALMART INC - CORP90321 285,000.00 284,887.69 09/09/20253.90009/09/2022 282,167.67 AA931142EW9 617 5.482WELLS FARGO & COMPANY - CORP90910 250,000.00 249,811.15 08/07/20265.45008/09/2023 254,073.25 A+94988J6D4 949 12,539,511.1912,396,168.0012,555,000.0012,535,643.86Subtotal and Average 3.314 606 Supranationals 4.406IADB - SUPRA91140 750,000.00 749,373.23 02/01/20274.37512/12/2023 756,390.75 AAA4581X0EM6 1,127 749,373.23756,390.75750,000.00483,463.48Subtotal and Average 4.406 1,127 Pass Through Securities (GNMA/CMO) 5.530ALLYA - ABS90886 165,000.00 164,971.87 05/15/20285.46007/19/2023 166,894.70 N/A02007WAC2 1,596 5.037BofA CC - ABS91148 145,000.00 144,980.53 11/15/20284.98012/14/2023 146,687.22 AAA05522RDH8 1,780 0.509CARMAX - ABS85858 26,675.57 26,641.45 08/15/20250.50010/21/2020 26,395.85 AAA14316HAC6 592 0.348CARMAX - ABS86024 36,543.46 36,516.78 12/15/20250.34001/27/2021 35,872.19 AAA14316NAC3 714 0.529CARMAX - ABS86173 102,063.55 102,008.60 02/17/20260.52004/21/2021 99,799.37 AAA14314QAC8 778 0.557CARMAX - ABS86290 276,544.63 276,499.14 06/15/20260.55007/28/2021 267,930.54 AAA14317DAC4 896 3.522CARMAX - ABS90145 98,181.31 98,166.38 02/16/20273.49004/28/2022 96,726.26 AAA14317HAC5 1,142 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 22 YTM 365 Page 5 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Pass Through Securities (GNMA/CMO) 5.410CARMAX - ABS90414 380,000.00 379,910.89 08/16/20275.34010/31/2022 381,105.42 AAA14318UAD3 1,323 0.347CAPITAL ONE - ABS86503 450,000.00 449,937.99 11/15/20261.04011/30/2021 434,061.45 AAA14041NFY2 1,049 2.820CAPITAL ONE - ABS90102 225,000.00 224,983.04 03/15/20272.80003/30/2022 219,295.13 AAA14041NFZ9 1,169 3.521CAPITAL ONE - ABS90210 195,000.00 194,968.84 05/15/20273.49006/14/2022 191,343.56 AAA14041NGA3 1,230 0.760COPAR - ABS86438 160,103.55 160,100.52 09/15/20260.77010/27/2021 154,951.58 AAA14044CAC6 988 4.351DCENT 2023 A1 A MTGE - ABS90706 225,000.00 224,986.95 03/15/20284.31004/11/2023 223,428.83 N/A254683CY9 1,535 0.580DISCOVER CARD ABS - ABS86368 280,000.00 279,940.05 09/15/20260.58009/27/2021 270,878.16 AAA254683CP8 988 3.510DISCOVER CARD ABS - ABS90274 205,000.00 204,974.56 07/15/20273.56008/09/2022 200,959.04 AAA254683CW3 1,291 3.036FHMS - MBS90187 725,000.00 729,644.53 05/25/20253.32905/24/2022 704,939.47 N/A3137BKRJ1 510 2.907FHMS - MBS90193 636,278.19 637,123.24 08/25/20243.06405/31/2022 626,455.33 AA+3137FBTA4 237 3.478FHMS - MBS90248 701,775.35 693,332.11 01/25/20253.02307/18/2022 686,431.73 AA+3137BHXJ1 390 3.493FHMS - MBS90260 550,000.00 543,640.63 11/25/20253.15107/26/2022 535,068.60 N/A3137BMTX4 694 3.447FHMS - MBS90270 425,000.00 421,829.10 03/25/20253.20508/08/2022 415,643.20 N/A3137BJP64 449 3.330FHMS - MBS90272 575,000.00 568,374.02 12/25/20252.99508/09/2022 556,891.53 N/A3137BN6G4 724 3.512FHMS - MBS90275 325,000.00 322,638.67 09/25/20253.30808/10/2022 317,009.88 AA+3137BM7C4 633 3.485FHMS - MBS90300 750,000.00 739,423.83 07/25/20253.01008/16/2022 729,312.75 AA+3137BLMZ8 571 3.758FHMS - MBS90315 494,659.53 488,147.80 10/25/20243.17109/02/2022 486,284.45 N/A3137BFE98 298 4.188FHMS - MBS90329 550,000.00 539,687.50 09/25/20243.24109/20/2022 541,704.90 AA+3137BEVH4 268 4.989FHMS - MBS90605 300,000.00 282,515.63 01/25/20262.74503/06/2023 289,101.30 N/A3137BNGT5 755 6.932FHMS - MBS90622 300,000.00 278,976.56 07/25/20262.57003/07/2023 286,480.80 N/A3137BRQJ7 936 5.113FHMS - MBS90633 347,710.68 336,790.39 08/25/20253.75003/09/2023 341,613.92 AA+3137FJXQ7 602 4.101FHMS - MBS90726 525,000.00 501,108.40 08/25/20262.65304/17/2023 500,938.20 N/A3137BSP72 967 4.308FHMS - MBS90796 350,000.00 332,800.78 07/25/20262.57005/23/2023 334,227.60 N/A3137BRQJ7 936 4.306FHMS - MBS90798 254,618.86 246,781.37 11/25/20263.34705/24/2023 246,771.25 N/A3137BTUM1 1,059 5.303FHMS - MBS91036 400,000.00 371,140.63 07/25/20262.28210/11/2023 380,211.20 AA+3137FNWX4 936 5.600FHMS - MBS91049 350,000.00 333,457.03 02/25/20263.20810/23/2023 340,350.15 AA+3137FLN34 786 5.156FHMS - MBS91088 600,000.00 568,289.06 09/25/20263.12011/20/2023 571,552.20 AAA3137BSRE5 998 5.657FITAT - ABS90929 510,000.00 509,968.38 08/15/20285.53008/23/2023 517,074.21 AAA31680EAD3 1,688 4.578FNMA - MBS90384 371,890.17 350,855.13 02/25/20262.70210/12/2022 358,059.57 AA+3136ARTE8 786 1.299FORDO - ABS86601 74,589.52 74,580.66 06/15/20261.29001/24/2022 72,585.75 AAA345286AC2 896 4.700FORDO - ABS90673 185,000.00 184,980.70 02/15/20284.65003/31/2023 184,316.43 AAA344928AD8 1,506 0.460GMCAR - ABS85744 10,979.96 10,922.76 04/16/20250.45008/19/2020 10,943.21 N/A362590AC5 471 0.682GMCAR - ABS86430 133,280.49 133,277.09 09/16/20260.68010/21/2021 128,812.66 N/A362554AC1 989 1.267GMCAR - ABS86592 141,771.98 141,759.66 11/16/20261.26001/19/2022 137,619.34 AAA380146AC4 1,050 3.668GMCAR - ABS90242 120,000.00 119,999.17 04/16/20273.64007/13/2022 118,061.52 N/A36265WAD5 1,201 4.513GMCAR - ABS90719 120,000.00 119,996.70 02/16/20284.47004/12/2023 119,227.92 AAA362583AD8 1,507 Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 23 YTM 365 Page 6 Par Value Book Value Maturity Date Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Investments Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date Pass Through Securities (GNMA/CMO) 5.858GMCAR - ABS91035 160,000.00 159,967.14 08/16/20285.78010/11/2023 164,057.12 AAA379930AD2 1,689 0.892HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES - ABS86545 153,241.48 153,209.17 01/21/20260.88011/24/2021 148,698.48 N/A43815GAC3 751 5.745HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES - ABS91070 85,000.00 84,985.03 06/21/20285.67011/08/2023 86,776.08 AAA438123AC5 1,633 0.377HAROT - ABS85801 2,529.48 2,511.12 10/18/20240.37009/29/2020 2,522.58 AAA43813KAC6 291 1.895HAROT - ABS90025 190,301.21 190,272.59 05/15/20261.88002/23/2022 185,224.16 AAA43815BAC4 865 4.713HAROT - ABS90806 185,000.00 184,970.03 11/15/20274.93005/30/2023 185,866.54 AAA437927AC0 1,414 0.385HART - ABS86185 49,164.35 49,146.47 09/15/20250.38004/28/2021 48,468.72 AAA44933LAC7 623 2.232HART - ABS90067 407,858.94 407,843.24 10/15/20262.22003/16/2022 398,578.11 AAA448977AD0 1,018 5.108HDMOT - ABS90593 120,000.00 119,987.92 12/15/20275.05002/23/2023 119,094.95 N/A41285JAD0 1,444 0.738HYUNDAI AUTO - ABS86480 117,387.39 117,361.19 05/15/20260.74011/17/2021 114,200.09 AAA44935FAD6 865 4.558MERCEDES BENZ AUTO - ABS90553 95,000.00 94,988.60 11/15/20274.51001/25/2023 94,392.86 AAA58770AAC7 1,414 4.511NAROT - ABS90343 200,000.00 199,958.62 05/17/20274.46009/28/2022 198,518.60 AAA65480JAC4 1,232 5.147TAOT 2023 B A3 - MBS90797 260,000.00 259,985.47 02/15/20284.71005/23/2023 259,601.16 N/A891941AD8 1,506 0.699TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS86475 159,167.78 159,164.39 04/15/20260.71011/15/2021 154,442.09 AAA89238JAC9 835 4.173TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS90299 135,000.00 134,977.44 04/15/20273.76008/16/2022 132,739.83 AAA89231CAD9 1,200 4.675TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS90565 170,000.00 169,999.92 09/15/20274.63001/30/2023 168,975.07 AAA891940AC2 1,353 1.024VOLKSWAGEN AUTO LOAN - ABS86533 195,924.03 195,916.35 06/22/20261.02012/13/2021 190,715.98 AAA92868KAC7 903 0.633WOART - ABS85684 5,306.08 5,288.44 05/15/20250.63006/24/2020 5,294.62 AAA98163WAC0 500 0.817WOART - ABS86452 187,982.39 187,956.79 10/15/20260.81011/03/2021 182,435.97 AAA98163KAC6 1,018 16,430,119.0416,294,621.3816,676,529.9316,468,602.26Subtotal and Average 3.608 886 Municipal Bonds 1.258FLORIDA ST - MUNI85786 205,000.00 205,000.00 07/01/20251.25809/16/2020 194,510.15 AA341271AD6 547 3.661MASS. CMNWLTH - MUNI90312 380,000.00 380,000.00 01/15/20253.66008/30/2022 375,668.76 N/A576004GY5 380 0.897NJ TPK AUTH - MUNI86035 165,000.00 165,000.00 01/01/20250.89702/04/2021 158,253.98 A+646140DN0 366 750,000.00728,432.89750,000.00750,000.00Subtotal and Average 2.396 423 76,052,043.39 77,246,529.93 3.819 75576,468,913.94 76,826,050.18Total and Average Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 24 YTM 365 Page 7 Par Value Book Value Stated RateMarket Value December 31, 2023 Portfolio Details - Cash Average BalanceIssuer Portfolio Management PFM Days to MaturityS&PCUSIPInvestment # Purchase Date 0.00 76,052,043.39 77,246,529.93 3.819 755 0Average Balance 76,468,913.94 76,826,050.18Total Cash and Investments Portfolio CCIP ACData Updated: SET_02: 01/18/2024 13:01 Run Date: 01/18/2024 - 13:01 PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.11 Page 25 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES B.2. STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AS OF DECEMBER 30, 2023 . CALIFORNIA STATE LOCAL STATE CONTROLLER ACCOUNT ESTIMATED1 AGENCY INVESTMENT ACCOUNTS ACCOUNT NUMBER BALANCE FAIR VALUE ACALANES UNION HIGH SCHOOL 75-07-010 13,494,283.42 13,407,152.60 ANTIOCH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-005 923,152.60 917,191.92 BRENTWOOD UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-013 8,678,925.24 8,622,886.56 BYRON UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-017 184,938.21 183,744.09 CANYON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-018 162,866.54 161,814.93 CCC REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 65-07-015 0.04 0.04 CONTRA COSTA COMMUNITY COLLEGE 75-07-001 700,843.12 696,317.87 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL INSURANCE GROUP 35-07-001 2,493,634.52 2,477,533.45 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT 70-07-001 58,100,000.00 57,724,855.91 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION 75-07-007 1,432,426.99 1,423,178.00 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 99-07-000 75,000,000.00 74,515,734.83 CROCKETT COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 16-07-004 4,684,182.78 4,653,937.63 DELTA DIABLO SANITATION DISTRICT 70-07-003 81,107.65 80,583.95 EAST CONTRA COSTA REG FEE & FINANCING AUTH 40-07-006 1,122,558.97 1,115,310.75 KENSINGTON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 17-07-011 2,527,668.29 2,511,347.47 KENSINGTON POLICE PROTECTION & COMMUNITY 16-07-003 666,952.59 662,646.16 SERVICES DISTRICT LAFAYETTE SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-012 1,839,180.19 1,827,304.84 MARTINEZ UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-011 21,738,049.89 21,597,690.15 MORAGA ORINDA FIRE DISTRICT 17-07-003 913,832.11 907,931.62 MORAGA SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-016 2,987.33 2,968.04 MT DIABLO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-008 3,827,710.42 3,802,995.40 MT VIEW SANITARY DISTRICT 70-07-008 11,070,924.40 10,999,440.89 OAKLEY UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-009 276,228.67 274,445.10 ORINDA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-015 2,641,732.12 2,624,674.80 PITTSBURG UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-002 39,285.30 39,031.64 RECLAMATION DISTRICT 799 60-07-001 187,585.07 186,373.86 RECLAMATION DISTRICT 800 60-07-003 3,935,508.72 3,910,097.66 RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2026 60-07-005 8,156.26 8,103.60 - RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2137 60-07-006 317,726.80 315,675.28 RODEO -HERCULES FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 17-07-001 2,216,022.13 2,201,713.57 SAN RAMON VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-004 267,653.47 265,925.27 WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 75-07-014 23,482,095.84 23,330,475.02 TOTAL 243,018,219.68 241,449,082.87 1. Calculated based on LAIF Fair Vaule Factor. Information only. Page 26 December 3.929 November 3.843 October 3.670 September 3.534 August 3.434 July 3.305** PMIA Average Life(1):230 LAIF Fair Value Factor(1):0.993543131 PMIA Daily(1):3.96 PMIA Quarter to Date(1):3.81 LAIF Apportionment Rate(2):4.00 LAIF Earnings Ratio(2):0.00010932476863589 LAIF Administrative Cost(1)*:0.29 Treasuries 61.22% Agencies 21.44% Certificates of Deposit/Bank Notes 7.72% Time Deposits 3.34% Commercial Paper 5.71% Corporate Bonds 0.36% Loans 0.21% Notes: The apportionment rate includes interest earned on the CalPERS Supplemental Pension Payment pursuant to Government Code 20825 (c)(1) and interest earned on the Wildfire Fund loan pursuant to Public Utility Code 3288 (a). *The percentage of administrative cost equals the total administrative cost divided by the quarterly interest earnings. The l aw provides that administrative costs are not to exceed 5% of quarterly EARNINGS of the fund. However, if the 13-week Daily Treasury Bill Rate on the last day of the fiscal year is below 1%, then administrative costs shall not exceed 8% of quarterly EARNINGS of the fund for the subsequent fiscal year. ** Revised Source: (1) State of California, Office of the Treasurer (2) State of Calfiornia, Office of the Controller PMIA Average Monthly Effective Yields(1) PMIA/LAIF Performance Report as of 1/17/24 Daily rates are now available here. View PMIA Daily Rates Quarterly Performance Quarter Ended 12/31/23 Chart does not include $2,164,000.00 in mortgages, which equates to 0.001%.Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding. Pooled Money Investment Account Monthly Portfolio Composition (1) 12/31/23 $158.0 billion Page 27 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES ASSET MANAGEMENT FUNDS B.3. ALLSPRING B.4. CAMP B.5. CalTRUST (LIQUIDITY)* B.6. US BANK *No investments were made in the CalTRUST Liquidity Fund during the quarter. Allspring GAAP31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyInvestment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsThe information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to yourcustody statement for official portfolio holdings and transactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custodystatement.Page 28 1 - 45 - 67 - 89 - 1011 - 1516 - 21Risk Summary (Contra Costa County)Performance Summary Gross of Fees (Contra Costa County) Performance Summary Net of Fees (Contra Costa County) GAAP FX Financials (Contra Costa County)Income Detail (Contra Costa County)Balance Sheet Classification (Contra Costa County) Table of Contents`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.*Additional information will be provided upon request.Page 29 Balance SheetBook Value + Accrued44,502,931.61Net Unrealized Gain/Loss36,796.20Market Value + Accrued44,539,727.81Portfolio CharacteristicsRisk MetricValueCash28,936.99MMFund885,826.63Fixed Income43,624,964.19Duration0.550Convexity0.008WAL0.600Years to Final Maturity 0.907Years to Effective Maturity 0.587Yield5.172Book Yield5.111Avg Credit RatingAA+/Aa1/AA+Issuer ConcentrationIssuer Concentration% of BaseMarket Value+ AccruedOther58.99%United States18.46%Farm Credit System6.85%Federal Home Loan Banks6.71%International Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment2.27%Gotham Funding Corporation2.24%Old Line Funding, LLC2.24%Jupiter Securitization Company LLC2.24%---100.00%Footnotes: 1,2Asset Class (%)Security Type (%)Market Sector (%)Risk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 30 Credit RatingCredit Duration Heat MapRating 0 - 1 1 - 2 2 - 3 3 - 4 4 - 5 5 - 7 7 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 30AAA 56.68% 11.07% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%AA 8.64% 3.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%A 12.71% 3.91% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%BBB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%BB 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%B 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%CCC 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%CC 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%C 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%NA 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%Time To MaturityDurationRisk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 31 Industry SectorIndustry GroupIndustry SubgroupMMF Asset AllocationCurrencyCountryRisk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 32 1: * Grouped by: Issuer Concentration. 2: * Groups Sorted by: % of Base Market Value + Accrued.Risk SummaryUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 33 Gross of Fees (includes trading).PeriodPeriod BeginPeriod EndTotal Return, Gross ofFeesWeighted AverageIndex ReturnExcess Total Return,Gross of FeesMonth to Date12/01/202312/31/20230.62%0.52%0.10%Quarter to Date10/01/202312/31/20231.70%1.49%0.20%Year to Date01/01/202312/31/20235.25%5.14%0.11%Prior Month11/01/202311/30/20230.63%0.52%0.11%Prior Quarter07/01/202309/30/20231.28%1.32%-0.04%Prior Year01/01/202212/31/20220.69%1.34%-0.65%Trailing Month12/01/202312/31/20230.62%0.52%0.10%Trailing Quarter10/01/202312/31/20231.70%1.49%0.20%Trailing Year01/01/202312/31/20235.25%5.14%0.11%AccountIndexIndex Start DateIndex End DateContra Costa CountyML 6 Month T-Bill01/01/198011/30/2004Contra Costa CountyICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index12/01/2004---Performance Summary Gross ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 34 Returns are actual and have not been annualized. No Tax Adjustment. Note that data will not exist prior to the performance inception date of: 04/01/2001. Historical data exists for the options shown below, only available on historical data boundaries: Reported Index Return is always Total Return.Begin Date,End DateReturn Type,Fee OptionsTax Options04/01/200101/31/2011Total ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Income ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Price ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment01/01/200801/31/2011Book ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax AdjustmentPerformance Summary Gross ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 35 Net of Fees (includes management and trading).PeriodPeriod BeginPeriod EndTotal Return, Net ofFeesWeighted AverageIndex ReturnExcess Total Return,Net of FeesMonth to Date12/01/202312/31/20230.61%0.52%0.09%Quarter to Date10/01/202312/31/20231.67%1.49%0.18%Year to Date01/01/202312/31/20235.15%5.14%0.01%Prior Month11/01/202311/30/20230.62%0.52%0.10%Prior Quarter07/01/202309/30/20231.26%1.32%-0.06%Prior Year01/01/202212/31/20220.60%1.34%-0.73%Trailing Month12/01/202312/31/20230.61%0.52%0.09%Trailing Quarter10/01/202312/31/20231.67%1.49%0.18%Trailing Year01/01/202312/31/20235.15%5.14%0.01%AccountIndexIndex Start DateIndex End DateContra Costa CountyML 6 Month T-Bill01/01/198011/30/2004Contra Costa CountyICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index12/01/2004---Performance Summary Net ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 36 Returns are actual and have not been annualized. No Tax Adjustment. Note that data will not exist prior to the performance inception date of: 04/01/2001. Historical data exists for the options shown below, only available on historical data boundaries: Reported Index Return is always Total Return.Begin Date,End DateReturn Type,Fee OptionsTax Options04/01/200101/31/2011Total ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Income ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment04/01/200101/31/2011Price ReturnGross of FeesNo Tax Adjustment01/01/200801/31/2011Book ReturnGross of Fees, Net of FeesGross Down Method, Gross Up Method, No Tax AdjustmentPerformance Summary Net ofFeesUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 37 Balance SheetContra Costa CountyAs of:09/30/202312/31/2023Book Value44,290,088.6044,264,673.38Accrued Balance182,897.41238,258.23Book Value + Accrued44,472,986.0144,502,931.61Net FX Unrealized AccruedGain/Loss0.000.00Net FX Unrealized Carrying ValueSecurity Gain/Loss0.000.00Net Market Unrealized CarryingValue Gain/Loss-156,573.7436,796.20Carrying Value and Accrued44,316,412.2644,539,727.81Income StatementContra Costa CountyBegin DateEnd Date10/01/202312/31/2023Net Amortization/Accretion Income249,423.99Interest Income304,223.82Dividend Income0.00Foreign Tax Withheld Expense0.00Misc Income0.00Net Market Allowance Expense0.00Net FX Allowance Expense0.00Income Subtotal304,223.82Net FX Realized Gain/Loss0.00Net Market Realized Gain/Loss0.00Net Total Holding Gain/Loss0.00Total Impairment Loss0.00Net Total Gain/Loss0.00Expense-10,655.72Net Income542,992.09Transfers In/Out-513,046.49Change in FX Unrealized Gain/Loss0.00Change in Market Unrealized Gain/Loss193,369.95GAAP FX FinancialsUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 38 Statement of Cash FlowsContra Costa CountyBegin DateEnd Date10/01/202312/31/2023Net Income542,992.09Amortization/Accretion on MS-218,215.65Change in Accrued on MS-19,690.58Net Gain/Loss on MS0.00Change in Unrealized G/L on CE-305.12Subtotal-238,211.35Purchase of MS-9,902,337.48Purchased Accrued of MS-32,582.74Sales of MS1,404,528.34Sold Accrued of MS0.00Maturities of MS9,246,379.28Net Purchases/Sales715,987.40Transfers of Cash & CE-513,046.49Total Change in Cash & CE507,721.65Beginning Cash & CE3,899,771.75Ending Cash & CE4,411,114.12GAAP FX FinancialsUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 39 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income94975P405ALLSPRING:GOVT MM I885,826.635.2312/31/202312/31/20230.00---19,885.690.000.000.0019,885.6903065WAB1AMCAR 2022-2 A2A105,256.964.2002/27/202412/18/20250.0006/22/20221,473.962.380.000.001,476.3402665WEQ0AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP500,000.005.8010/03/202510/03/20250.0010/04/20237,008.3356.690.000.007,065.0302582JJR2AMXCA 2021-1 A800,000.000.9011/14/202411/16/20260.0001/31/20231,800.007,082.000.000.008,882.00037833CU2APPLE INC700,000.002.8505/11/202405/11/20240.0006/02/20234,987.504,240.290.000.009,227.7904821UX64Atlantic Asset Securitization Corp.0.000.0010/06/202310/06/20230.0008/04/20230.00752.780.000.00752.7804821TAJ4Atlantic Asset Securitization Corp.1,000,000.000.0001/18/202401/18/20240.0010/23/20230.0010,791.670.000.0010,791.6706051GFB0BANK OF AMERICA CORP700,000.004.1301/22/202401/22/20240.0006/12/20237,218.752,636.380.000.009,855.1306406HCV9BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP700,000.003.4005/15/202405/15/20240.0006/01/20235,950.003,579.830.000.009,529.8309247XAL5BLACKROCK INC500,000.003.5003/18/202403/18/20240.0005/27/20224,375.00-1,112.070.000.003,262.9305593AAC3BMWLT 2023-1 A3700,000.005.1611/12/202411/25/20250.0002/27/20239,030.0062.110.000.009,092.1113077DKD3CALIFORNIA ST UNIV REV300,000.001.7711/01/202511/01/20250.0011/14/2023691.681,369.400.000.002,061.0814318XAB1CARMX 2023-4 A2A350,000.006.0812/04/202412/15/20260.0010/18/20234,315.112.440.000.004,317.55CCYUSDCash-2.240.0012/31/202312/31/2023-513,046.49---0.000.000.00-10,655.72-10,655.7214912L5X5CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP0.003.7511/24/202311/24/20230.0012/02/20223,864.581,141.410.000.005,006.0014913UAB6CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP500,000.005.1508/11/202508/11/20250.0012/01/20232,145.83-43.820.000.002,102.0117325FAS7CITIBANK NA600,000.003.6501/23/202401/23/20240.0008/25/20225,475.00-158.130.000.005,316.87254683BZ7DCENT 2017-4 A750,000.002.5304/14/202404/15/20240.0010/26/20233,426.044,713.220.000.008,139.2630231GAC6EXXON MOBIL CORP579,000.003.1803/15/202403/15/20240.0004/17/20234,597.262,341.870.000.006,939.133133ENJ84FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.003.3808/26/202408/26/20240.0011/04/20224,218.751,801.720.000.006,020.473133ENL40FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.003.5009/13/202409/13/20240.0007/26/20234,375.002,304.450.000.006,679.453133EPPC3FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.005.3807/03/202407/03/20240.0007/03/202313,437.500.000.000.0013,437.50Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 40 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income3133EPYK5FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.005.1310/10/202510/10/20250.0010/10/202311,531.25-14.930.000.0011,516.323130A0XE5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.003.2503/08/202403/08/20240.0009/29/20228,125.002,646.310.000.0010,771.313130AQF57FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS0.000.6312/22/202312/22/20230.0012/22/2021703.13124.120.000.00827.25313384MU0FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS0.000.0010/10/202310/10/20230.0005/23/20230.001,285.000.000.001,285.00313384NC9FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS0.000.0010/18/202310/18/20230.0004/17/20230.002,295.000.000.002,295.00313384TY5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.000.0003/06/202403/06/20240.0003/06/20230.0012,956.670.000.0012,956.67313384TW9FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.000.0003/04/202403/04/20240.0008/14/20230.0013,352.780.000.0013,352.7834528LAD7FORDL 2022-A A3279,315.313.2303/16/202405/15/20250.0011/30/20223,034.112,754.620.000.005,788.73380130AB0GMALT 2022-3 A2A0.004.0112/20/202310/21/20240.0008/17/2022272.570.720.000.00273.30380130AB0GMALT 2022-3 A2A0.004.0112/20/202310/21/20240.0008/17/2022378.980.740.000.00379.72362541AB0GMALT 2023-1 A2A235,680.175.2704/20/202406/20/20250.0002/16/20233,761.069.330.000.003,770.3838346MXP4Gotham Funding Corporation0.000.0010/23/202310/23/20230.0007/21/20230.003,348.890.000.003,348.8938346LA55Gotham Funding Corporation1,000,000.000.0001/05/202401/05/20240.0011/08/20230.008,175.000.000.008,175.0043815JAB9HAROT 2023-1 A2394,100.995.2206/01/202410/21/20250.0002/24/20235,943.907.540.000.005,951.4443815QAB3HAROT 2023-3 A2400,000.005.7109/18/202403/18/20260.0011/30/20231,966.78-22.430.000.001,944.3544933DAB7HART 2022-C A2A264,042.285.3504/18/202411/17/20250.0011/09/20224,158.235.340.000.004,163.58448979AB0HART 2023-A A2A202,057.595.1905/17/202412/15/20250.0004/12/20232,965.103.750.000.002,968.85438516CH7HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC0.004.8511/01/202411/01/20240.0011/02/20223,132.295.590.000.003,137.88438516CH7HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC750,000.004.8511/01/202411/01/20240.0011/02/20225,961.4610.480.000.005,971.944581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK1,000,000.000.5009/23/202409/23/20240.0010/12/20231,097.2210,558.010.000.0011,655.23459058HC0INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM1,000,000.005.6408/06/202408/06/20240.0008/11/202314,446.94-539.040.000.0013,907.90Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 41 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income459058JM6INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM0.000.2511/24/202311/24/20230.0007/11/2023489.519,901.650.000.0010,391.17459058JM6INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM0.000.2511/24/202311/24/20230.0008/11/2023117.782,427.430.000.002,545.2147787NAC3JDOT 2020-B A30.000.5111/15/202311/15/20240.0009/09/20215.66-3.020.000.002.6447787JAC2JDOT 2022 A3422,520.820.3609/29/202409/15/20260.0004/21/20232,701.984,018.380.000.006,720.3624422EVN6JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP500,000.000.4501/17/202401/17/20240.0001/05/2023562.505,293.050.000.005,855.5546625HKC3JPMORGAN CHASE & CO700,000.003.1301/23/202501/23/20250.0002/02/20235,468.752,309.830.000.007,778.584820P3Y64Jupiter Securitization Company LLC0.000.0011/06/202311/06/20230.0008/10/20230.006,850.000.000.006,850.004820P3Z14Jupiter Securitization Company LLC0.000.0012/01/202312/01/20230.0011/06/20230.003,743.060.000.003,743.064820P2AH8Jupiter Securitization Company LLC1,000,000.000.0001/17/202401/17/20240.0012/29/20230.00444.170.000.00444.1758769KAE4MBALT 2021-B A4285,000.000.5102/12/202403/15/20270.0006/01/2023363.392,810.220.000.003,173.6158768PAC8MBART 2022-1 A3400,000.005.2104/08/202508/16/20270.0006/26/20235,210.0176.940.000.005,286.9558770AAB9MBART 2023-1 A260,021.245.0904/29/202401/15/20260.0001/25/20234,028.732.320.000.004,031.0558770AAB9MBART 2023-1 A20.005.0904/10/202401/15/20260.0001/25/2023-3,121.18-2.240.000.00-3,123.4261761JVL0MORGAN STANLEY0.003.7010/23/202410/23/20240.0004/17/20231,654.72476.040.000.002,130.7661761JVL0MORGAN STANLEY700,000.003.7010/23/202410/23/20240.0004/17/20234,820.281,428.110.000.006,248.3965480DAC7NALT 2021-A A30.000.5211/15/202308/15/20240.0003/04/202212.0817.090.000.0029.1765480DAC7NALT 2021-A A30.000.5211/15/202308/15/20240.0005/19/202210.2027.860.000.0038.0665480JAB6NAROT 2022-B A294,444.864.5004/03/202408/16/20250.0006/01/20231,270.59367.690.000.001,638.2765480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A3400,000.004.4604/08/202505/17/20270.0007/27/20234,460.01538.450.000.004,998.4665480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A375,000.004.4604/08/202505/17/20270.0009/21/2023836.25112.150.000.00948.40637432MV4NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVEFINANCE CORP0.003.4011/15/202311/15/20230.0003/10/20232,908.891,694.700.000.004,603.59Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 42 Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income63743HFF4NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVEFINANCE CORP700,000.005.4510/30/202510/30/20250.0012/01/20233,179.17-157.710.000.003,021.46672325S81OAKLAND CALIF UNI SCH DIST ALAMEDA CNTY500,000.005.7002/01/202402/01/20240.0011/22/20233,087.500.000.000.003,087.5067983TAB2Old Line Funding, LLC1,000,000.000.0001/11/202401/11/20240.0009/11/20230.0014,004.440.000.0014,004.4469371RR40PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP750,000.000.5008/09/202408/09/20240.0008/30/2023937.509,282.000.000.0010,219.50713448FU7PEPSICO INC0.005.7511/12/202411/12/20240.0011/10/202379.440.000.000.0079.44713448FU7PEPSICO INC500,000.005.7511/12/202411/12/20240.0011/10/20233,911.740.000.000.003,911.74CCYUSDReceivable28,939.230.0012/31/202312/31/20230.00---0.000.000.000.000.00769036BD5RIVERSIDE CALIF PENSION OBLIG750,000.002.7506/01/202406/01/20240.0011/29/20231,833.332,005.420.000.003,838.75828807DG9SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP500,000.002.0009/13/202409/13/20240.0011/01/20231,666.673,205.870.000.004,872.54857477BC6STATE STREET CORP0.003.7812/03/202312/03/20240.0005/24/20234,552.184,243.950.000.008,796.1389239KAC5TAOT 2022-A A3411,680.211.2307/18/202406/15/20260.0006/21/20221,392.603,437.590.000.004,830.19891941AB2TAOT 2023-B A2A221,994.135.2806/30/202404/15/20260.0005/23/20233,071.480.880.000.003,072.3688602UY79Thunder Bay Funding, LLC0.000.0011/07/202311/07/20230.0006/26/20230.005,580.830.000.005,580.8389236TJN6TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP700,000.000.6309/13/202409/13/20240.0010/31/20221,093.757,031.200.000.008,124.9586787EBC0TRUIST BANK600,000.003.2004/01/202404/01/20240.0005/19/20224,800.00-50.290.000.004,749.719128282U3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.001.8808/31/202408/31/20240.0010/24/20233,554.266,565.500.000.0010,119.7791282CCC3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,500,000.000.2505/15/202405/15/20240.0005/17/2023942.7616,838.300.000.0017,781.0691282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.000.8801/31/202401/31/20240.0001/31/20222,187.50388.910.000.002,576.4191282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.000.8801/31/202401/31/20240.0005/22/20232,187.5010,498.280.000.0012,685.7891282CEG2UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.002.2503/31/202403/31/20240.0008/30/20225,655.742,867.550.000.008,523.2991282CFA4UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.003.0007/31/202407/31/20240.0008/10/20223,750.00328.970.000.004,078.97Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 43 * Weighted by: Ending Base Market Value + Accrued. * Holdings Displayed by: Lot.Identifier,DescriptionEnding Base Current Units,CouponEffectiveMaturity,Final MaturityTransfers In/Out,Settle DateInterest/DividendIncome,Net Amortization/Accretion IncomeNet Realized Gain/LossBase Expense,Base Net Income912797FB8UNITED STATES TREASURY0.000.0010/19/202310/19/20230.0006/26/20230.002,591.250.000.002,591.2591282CHD6UNITED STATES TREASURY750,000.004.2505/31/202505/31/20250.0009/18/20238,012.301,610.240.000.009,622.5491282CHL8UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.004.6306/30/202506/30/20250.0008/28/202311,563.881,117.700.000.0012,681.5891282CJE2UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.005.0010/31/202510/31/20250.0012/01/20232,129.12-98.600.000.002,030.5291324PEM0UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC0.005.0010/15/202410/15/20240.0010/28/20221,458.336.430.000.001,464.7791324PEM0UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC700,000.005.0010/15/202410/15/20240.0010/28/20227,291.6733.030.000.007,324.7092512MX46Versailles Commercial Paper LLC0.000.0010/04/202310/04/20230.0009/01/20230.00451.670.000.00451.6792512LD32Versailles Commercial Paper LLC1,000,000.000.0004/03/202404/03/20240.0012/07/20230.003,805.560.000.003,805.5692868AAB1VWALT 2022-A A20.003.0201/20/202410/21/20240.0006/14/2022315.750.980.000.00316.7392868AAB1VWALT 2022-A A25,106.133.0201/20/202410/21/20240.0006/14/2022485.781.080.000.00486.8692868AAC9VWALT 2022-A A3350,000.003.4404/18/202407/21/20250.0002/27/20233,009.991,520.560.000.004,530.5592348KAH6VZMT 2022-2 A800,000.001.5301/20/202507/20/20280.0009/11/20233,060.007,965.540.000.0011,025.5494988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.005.5507/01/202508/01/20250.0008/09/20234,162.5027.490.000.004,189.9994988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.005.5507/01/202508/01/20250.0010/18/20233,376.25111.640.000.003,487.8998163WAC0WOART 2020-B A319,337.710.6301/14/202405/15/20250.0010/14/202287.32441.870.000.00529.2098163NAC0WOLS 2022-A A3416,917.663.2104/07/202402/18/20250.0002/28/20233,833.662,703.850.000.006,537.51------44,636,239.692.8108/02/202411/27/2024-513,046.49---304,223.82249,423.990.00-10,655.72542,992.09Income DetailUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 44 CESTIdentifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued94975P405ALLSPRING:GOVT MM I885,826.631.000012/31/20235.2312/31/2023 AAACash5.225.22885,826.63885,826.630.00885,826.630.00885,826.63CCYUSDReceivable28,939.231.000012/31/20230.0012/31/2023 AAACash0.000.0028,939.2328,939.230.0028,939.230.0028,939.23CCYUSDCash-2.241.000012/31/20230.0012/31/2023 AAACash0.000.00-2.24-2.240.00-2.240.00-2.2438346LA55Gotham Funding Corporation1,000,000.0099.896101/05/20240.0001/05/2024 A-1+Financial5.535.34991,219.44999,394.44-433.44998,961.000.00998,961.0004821TAJ4Atlantic Asset Securitization Corp.1,000,000.0099.702401/18/20240.0001/18/2024 A-1+Financial5.675.37986,587.50997,379.17-355.17997,024.000.00997,024.00672325S81OAKLAND CALIF UNI SCH DIST ALAMEDA CNTY500,000.00100.021002/01/20245.7002/01/2024 A+Municipal5.705.43500,000.00500,000.00105.00500,105.003,087.50503,192.504820P2AH8Jupiter Securitization Company LLC1,000,000.0099.717301/17/20240.0001/17/2024 A-1+Financial5.415.37997,186.94997,631.11-458.11997,173.000.00997,173.00------4,414,763.6279.317401/13/20241.7001/13/2024 AAA---5.455.314,389,757.504,409,168.34-1,141.724,408,026.623,087.504,411,114.12Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued06051GFB0BANK OF AMERICA CORP700,000.0099.918001/22/20244.1301/22/2024 AA-Financial5.665.31693,581.00699,398.2228.08699,426.2912,753.13712,179.4209247XAL5BLACKROCK INC500,000.0099.565303/18/20243.5003/18/2024 AA-Financial2.595.45507,990.00500,930.76-3,104.13497,826.635,006.94502,833.5730231GAC6EXXON MOBIL CORP579,000.0099.509703/15/20243.1803/15/2024 AAIndustrial4.835.47570,523.44577,116.32-954.94576,161.385,414.55581,575.9306406HCV9BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP700,000.0099.160005/15/20243.4005/15/2024 AA-Financial5.515.65686,420.00694,746.99-626.99694,120.003,041.11697,161.11Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 45 Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued3130A0XE5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.0099.600603/08/20243.2503/08/2024 AAAAgency4.345.31984,870.00998,072.79-2,066.32996,006.4710,201.391,006,207.8661761JVL0MORGAN STANLEY700,000.0098.701510/23/20243.7010/23/2024 A+Financial4.835.33688,513.00693,873.60-2,962.80690,910.804,892.22695,803.02254683BZ7DCENT 2017-4 A750,000.0099.137404/15/20242.5304/14/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.055.55737,900.39742,613.61916.74743,530.35843.33744,373.68037833CU2APPLE INC700,000.0099.065605/11/20242.8505/11/2024 AAAIndustrial5.355.35684,145.00693,962.19-503.15693,459.052,770.83696,229.889128282U3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0097.953108/31/20241.8808/31/2024 AAAGovernment5.495.01970,312.50976,878.002,653.25979,531.256,335.85985,867.1017325FAS7CITIBANK NA600,000.0099.888101/23/20243.6501/23/2024 AA-Financial3.655.25600,924.00600,000.00-671.20599,328.809,611.67608,940.4686787EBC0TRUIST BANK600,000.0099.340004/01/20243.2004/01/2024 A+Financial3.175.77600,356.40600,032.80-3,992.53596,040.264,800.00600,840.26828807DG9SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP500,000.0097.719109/13/20242.0009/13/2024 A-Financial6.005.32483,340.00486,545.872,049.42488,595.283,000.00491,595.28459058HC0INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPM1,000,000.00100.159708/06/20245.6408/06/2024 AAAGovernment5.495.141,002,115.131,001,277.28319.371,001,596.658,780.641,010,377.2924422EVN6JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP500,000.0099.793101/17/20240.4501/17/2024 A+Industrial4.804.59478,310.00499,079.47-114.12498,965.341,025.00499,990.3491282CCC3UNITED STATES TREASURY1,500,000.0098.203105/15/20240.2505/15/2024 AAAGovernment4.885.081,433,378.911,475,291.63-2,244.751,473,046.88484.201,473,531.0869371RR40PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP750,000.0097.061008/09/20240.5008/09/2024 A+Industrial5.635.45715,192.50727,703.02254.64727,957.661,479.17729,436.8289236TJN6TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP700,000.0096.842609/13/20240.6309/13/2024 A+Industrial4.855.24647,801.00680,434.93-2,536.69677,898.231,312.50679,210.734581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK1,000,000.0096.780909/23/20240.5009/23/2024 AAAGovernment5.465.02954,770.00965,328.012,480.64967,808.651,361.11969,169.7691282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0099.645701/31/20240.8801/31/2024 AAAGovernment1.034.83996,914.06999,873.18-3,416.11996,457.073,661.681,000,118.75Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 46 Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued91282CDV0UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0099.645701/31/20240.8801/31/2024 AAAGovernment5.184.83971,015.63996,576.65-119.58996,457.073,661.681,000,118.7591282CEG2UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.0099.253903/31/20242.2503/31/2024 AAAGovernment3.435.14981,953.13997,194.79-4,655.73992,539.065,717.21998,256.2792868AAB1VWALT 2022-A A25,106.1399.944810/21/20243.0201/20/2024 AAAAsset Backed3.044.005,105.735,106.12-2.805,103.314.715,108.0291282CFA4UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.0098.820307/31/20243.0007/31/2024 AAAGovernment3.275.05497,421.88499,241.94-5,140.38494,101.566,277.17500,378.733133ENJ84FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.0099.027708/26/20243.3808/26/2024 AAAAgency4.884.89487,055.00495,339.02-200.59495,138.425,859.38500,997.803133ENL40FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP500,000.0099.035109/13/20243.5009/13/2024 AAAAgency5.424.90489,604.91493,587.611,588.07495,175.685,250.00500,425.6891324PEM0UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC700,000.0099.871510/15/20245.0010/15/2024 A+Industrial5.025.15699,692.00699,876.46-776.21699,100.257,388.89706,489.14438516CH7HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC750,000.0099.646011/01/20244.8511/01/2024 AIndustrial4.865.27749,872.50749,946.73-2,602.04747,344.696,062.50753,407.19769036BD5RIVERSIDE CALIF PENSION OBLIG750,000.0098.949006/01/20242.7506/01/2024 AAMunicipal5.805.28738,757.50740,762.921,354.58742,117.501,718.75743,836.25313384TY5FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.0099.024403/06/20240.0003/06/2024 A-1+Agency5.275.22948,455.00990,845.83-601.94990,243.890.00990,243.89313384TW9FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS1,000,000.0099.053103/04/20240.0003/04/2024 A-1+Agency5.375.30970,536.81990,856.25-325.42990,530.830.00990,530.833133EPPC3FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.00100.127507/03/20245.3807/03/2024 AAAAgency5.375.121,000,000.001,000,000.001,275.191,001,275.1926,576.391,027,851.5867983TAB2Old Line Funding, LLC1,000,000.0099.807201/11/20240.0001/11/2024 A-1+Financial5.565.35981,428.89998,477.78-405.78998,072.000.00998,072.0092512LD32Versailles Commercial Paper LLC1,000,000.0098.538804/03/20240.0004/03/2024 A-1+Financial5.615.56982,037.78985,843.34-455.34985,388.000.00985,388.00713448FU7PEPSICO INC500,000.00100.154811/12/20245.7511/12/2024 A+Industrial5.845.04500,000.00500,000.00773.83500,773.833,991.19504,765.02Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 47 LTIdentifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued------25,984,106.1399.041105/23/20242.3105/23/2024 AA+---4.885.2125,440,294.0925,756,814.10-24,785.7725,732,028.33159,283.2125,891,311.54Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued46625HKC3JPMORGAN CHASE & CO700,000.0097.910201/23/20253.1301/23/2025 AA-Financial4.515.17681,898.00690,258.56-4,887.07685,371.509,600.69694,972.1998163WAC0WOART 2020-B A319,337.7199.784005/15/20250.6301/14/2024 AAAAsset Backed2.285.5718,935.8419,325.42-29.4819,295.955.4119,301.3658769KAE4MBALT 2021-B A4285,000.0099.380203/15/20270.5102/12/2024 AAAAsset Backed9.225.80273,633.40281,258.641,974.81283,233.4664.60283,298.0613077DKD3CALIFORNIA ST UNIV REV300,000.0094.944011/01/20251.7711/01/2025 AAMunicipal5.484.66279,516.00280,885.403,946.60284,832.00883.00285,715.0002582JJR2AMXCA 2021-1 A800,000.0096.396711/16/20260.9011/14/2024 AAAAsset Backed4.545.27749,656.25775,443.95-4,270.19771,173.76320.00771,493.7692348KAH6VZMT 2022-2 A800,000.0096.325307/20/20281.5301/20/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.684.25756,968.75766,665.933,936.79770,602.72374.00770,976.7289239KAC5TAOT 2022-A A3411,680.2197.301306/15/20261.2307/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed4.626.35393,460.14402,553.91-1,983.71400,570.19225.05400,795.2547787JAC2JDOT 2022 A3422,520.8297.766409/15/20260.3609/29/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.975.46406,560.76411,042.932,040.55413,083.48435.67413,519.1598163NAC0WOLS 2022-A A3416,917.6699.377202/18/20253.2104/07/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.775.64407,813.87413,370.26950.88414,321.14594.80414,915.9434528LAD7FORDL 2022-A A3279,315.3199.548805/15/20253.2303/16/2024 AAAAsset Backed7.075.49272,637.93277,620.86434.20278,055.07400.97278,456.0492868AAC9VWALT 2022-A A3350,000.0099.227107/21/20253.4404/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.646.11342,083.98346,599.04695.91347,294.96367.89347,662.8403065WAB1AMCAR 2022-2 A2A105,256.9699.663712/18/20254.2002/27/2024 AAAAsset Backed4.246.38105,248.99105,255.38-352.38104,903.00159.64105,062.64Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 48 Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued65480JAB6NAROT 2022-B A294,444.8699.680008/16/20254.5004/03/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.865.8193,714.3994,068.8673.7794,142.63188.8994,331.5265480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A3400,000.0099.263405/17/20274.4604/08/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.515.12393,156.25394,099.802,953.84397,053.64792.89397,846.5365480JAC4NAROT 2022-B A375,000.0099.263405/17/20274.4604/08/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.615.1273,666.9973,791.73655.8374,447.56148.6774,596.2263743HFF4NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVEFINANCE CORP700,000.00101.005310/30/20255.4510/30/2025 AFinancial5.174.87703,556.00703,398.293,638.68707,036.976,464.31713,501.2844933DAB7HART 2022-C A2A264,042.2899.926011/17/20255.3504/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.425.67264,025.94264,036.05-189.15263,846.89627.83264,474.7358768PAC8MBART 2022-1 A3400,000.00100.142108/16/20275.2104/08/2025 AAAAsset Backed5.415.15399,015.63399,173.701,394.70400,568.40926.22401,494.6258770AAB9MBART 2023-1 A260,021.2499.833501/15/20265.0904/29/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.155.6760,019.1760,020.29-98.9959,921.30135.7860,057.0805593AAC3BMWLT 2023-1 A3700,000.0099.873711/25/20255.1611/12/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.275.37699,507.81699,715.76-600.00699,115.76602.00699,717.76362541AB0GMALT 2023-1 A2A235,680.1799.922006/20/20255.2704/20/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.345.56235,660.92235,675.24-178.89235,496.34379.51235,875.8543815JAB9HAROT 2023-1 A2394,100.9999.834010/21/20255.2206/01/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.285.69394,077.30394,088.36-641.46393,446.90571.45394,018.35448979AB0HART 2023-A A2A202,057.5999.859112/15/20255.1905/17/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.255.63202,045.91202,050.94-278.01201,772.93466.08202,239.0114913UAB6CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP500,000.00100.726108/11/20255.1508/11/2025 A+Industrial5.044.69500,875.00500,831.182,799.43503,630.6010,013.89513,644.49891941AB2TAOT 2023-B A2A221,994.1399.850904/15/20265.2806/30/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.345.65221,989.00221,990.65-327.60221,663.05520.95222,184.0091282CHD6UNITED STATES TREASURY750,000.0099.644505/31/20254.2505/31/2025 AAAGovernment5.154.50739,130.86740,968.646,365.35747,333.982,786.89750,120.8791282CHL8UNITED STATES TREASURY1,000,000.00100.253906/30/20254.6306/30/2025 AAAGovernment5.094.46991,835.94993,366.709,172.361,002,539.06127.061,002,666.12Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 49 Summary* Grouped by: BS Class 2. * Groups Sorted by: BS Class 2. * Weighted by: Base Market Value + Accrued, except Book Yield by Base Book Value + Accrued. * Holdings Displayed by: Lot.Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued94988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.00101.018608/01/20255.5507/01/2025 AAFinancial5.594.84299,784.00299,827.323,228.34303,055.666,567.50309,623.1694988J6B8WELLS FARGO BANK NA300,000.00101.018608/01/20255.5507/01/2025 AAFinancial5.744.84299,028.00299,139.643,916.02303,055.666,567.50309,623.1643815QAB3HAROT 2023-3 A2400,000.00100.295203/18/20265.7109/18/2024 AAAAsset Backed5.665.35400,375.00400,352.57828.15401,180.72824.78402,005.5002665WEQ0AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP500,000.00101.739110/03/20255.8010/03/2025 A-Industrial5.854.77499,535.00499,591.699,103.81508,695.517,008.33515,703.843133EPYK5FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP1,000,000.00101.212910/10/20255.1310/10/2025 AAAAgency5.124.411,000,131.481,000,116.5512,012.091,012,128.6411,531.251,023,659.8914318XAB1CARMX 2023-4 A2A350,000.00100.784112/15/20266.0812/04/2024 AAAAsset Backed6.165.27349,976.27349,978.712,765.71352,744.42945.78353,690.2091282CJE2UNITED STATES TREASURY500,000.00101.160210/31/20255.0010/31/2025 AAAGovernment4.754.34502,226.56502,127.963,672.82505,800.784,258.24510,059.02------14,237,369.9499.499002/08/20264.0502/08/2025 AA+---5.435.0614,011,747.3514,098,690.9462,723.6914,161,414.6375,887.5214,237,302.15Identifier,DescriptionBase Current Units,Market PriceFinal Maturity,CouponEffectiveMaturityRating,Market SectorBook Yield,YieldBase Original Cost,Base Book Value,Base Net Total UnrealizedGain/LossBase Market Value,Base Accrued Balance,Base Market Value +Accrued------44,636,239.6997.234111/27/20242.8108/02/2024 AA+---5.115.1743,841,798.9444,264,673.3836,796.2044,301,469.58238,258.2344,539,727.81Balance Sheet ClassificationUS Dollar01 October 2023 to 31 December 2023Contra Costa CountyAccount: XXX235Investment Strategy: Global Liquidity SolutionsPrimary Benchmark: ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index`The information contained in this report represents estimated trade date investment calculations. Certain calculations may not be available for all time periods. Please refer to your custody statement for official portfolio holdings andtransactions. Note that certain accounting methods may cause differences between this investment report and your custody statement.Page 50 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 351,373,478.26 96,522,968.68 (111,373,478.26) 0.00 $336,522,968.68 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 1,522,968.68 Cash Dividends and Income October 31, 2023 September 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 336,522,968.68 351,373,478.26 $336,522,968.68 $351,373,478.26 Total Asset Allocation 100.00% CAMP Pool Account 4017-001 Page 1 Page 51 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDateTransaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 351,373,478.26 Opening Balance 10/02/23 10/02/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (60,000,000.00) 291,373,478.26 10/04/23 10/04/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (1,373,478.26) 290,000,000.00 10/06/23 10/06/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (10,000,000.00) 280,000,000.00 10/13/23 10/13/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 30,000,000.00 310,000,000.00 10/16/23 10/16/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 20,000,000.00 330,000,000.00 10/19/23 10/19/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 20,000,000.00 350,000,000.00 10/20/23 10/20/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 25,000,000.00 375,000,000.00 10/26/23 10/26/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (40,000,000.00) 335,000,000.00 10/31/23 11/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 1,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 322,762,690.43 12,849,546.27 0.00 (1,085,239,072.13) 1,101,940,576.67 319,821,464.14 1,522,968.68 336,522,968.68 0.00 (111,373,478.26) 96,522,968.68 351,373,478.26 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance October January-October 5.56% Account 4017-001 Page 2 Page 52 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 25,193,841.99 118,903.78 0.00 0.00 $25,312,745.77 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 118,903.78 Cash Dividends and Income Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 10,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $10,000,000.00 CAMP TERM Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Cash Dividends and Income October 31, 2023 September 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 25,312,745.77 25,193,841.99 CAMP TERM 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 $35,312,745.77 $35,193,841.99 Total Asset Allocation 71.68% CAMP Pool 28.32% CAMP TERM Account 6164-001 Page 1 Page 53 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Investment Holdings Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 CAMP TERM Date Security Description Date Rate Amount Maturity Est. Value atSettlementMaturityInvestment Date Trade Estimated Earnings 10,264,579.24 78,450.82 10,000,000.00 5.6300 03/01/24TERM - California Asset Management Program Term Dec 2409/11/2309/08/23 $10,000,000.00 $78,450.82 $10,264,579.24 Total Account 6164-001 Page 2 Page 54 For the Month Ending October 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 25,193,841.99 Opening Balance 10/31/23 11/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 118,903.78 25,312,745.77 25,312,745.77 25,312,745.77 25,312,745.77 25,197,677.60 310,151.52 0.00 (10,000,000.00) 34,310,151.52 1,002,594.25 118,903.78 25,312,745.77 0.00 0.00 118,903.78 25,193,841.99 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance October July-October 5.56% Account 6164-001 Page 3 Page 55 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 336,522,968.68 41,484,246.94 (26,522,968.68) 0.00 $351,484,246.94 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 1,484,246.94 Cash Dividends and Income November 30, 2023 October 31, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 351,484,246.94 336,522,968.68 $351,484,246.94 $336,522,968.68 Total Asset Allocation 100.00% CAMP Pool Account 4017-001 Page 1 Page 56 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 336,522,968.68 Opening Balance 11/06/23 11/06/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (1,522,968.68) 335,000,000.00 11/07/23 11/07/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (25,000,000.00) 310,000,000.00 11/09/23 11/09/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 10,000,000.00 320,000,000.00 11/30/23 11/30/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 30,000,000.00 350,000,000.00 11/30/23 12/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 1,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 323,636,636.34 14,333,793.21 0.00 (1,111,762,040.81) 1,143,424,823.61 319,821,464.14 1,484,246.94 351,484,246.94 0.00 (26,522,968.68) 41,484,246.94 336,522,968.68 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance November January-November 5.58% Account 4017-001 Page 2 Page 57 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 25,312,745.77 116,103.08 0.00 0.00 $25,428,848.85 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 116,103.08 Cash Dividends and Income Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 10,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $10,000,000.00 CAMP TERM Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Cash Dividends and Income November 30, 2023 October 31, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 25,428,848.85 25,312,745.77 CAMP TERM 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 $35,428,848.85 $35,312,745.77 Total Asset Allocation 71.77% CAMP Pool 28.23% CAMP TERM Account 6164-001 Page 1 Page 58 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Investment Holdings Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 CAMP TERM Date Security Description Date Rate Amount Maturity Est. Value atSettlementMaturityInvestment Date Trade Estimated Earnings 10,264,579.24 124,598.36 10,000,000.00 5.6300 03/01/24TERM - California Asset Management Program Term Dec 2409/11/2309/08/23 $10,000,000.00 $124,598.36 $10,264,579.24 Total Account 6164-001 Page 2 Page 59 For the Month Ending November 30, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 25,312,745.77 Opening Balance 11/30/23 12/01/23 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 116,103.08 25,428,848.85 25,428,848.85 25,428,848.85 25,428,848.85 25,316,615.87 426,254.60 0.00 (10,000,000.00) 34,426,254.60 1,002,594.25 116,103.08 25,428,848.85 0.00 0.00 116,103.08 25,312,745.77 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance November July-November 5.58% Account 6164-001 Page 3 Page 60 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 351,484,246.94 372,025,670.66 (271,484,246.94) 0.00 $452,025,670.66 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 2,025,670.66 Cash Dividends and Income December 31, 2023 November 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 452,025,670.66 351,484,246.94 $452,025,670.66 $351,484,246.94 Total Asset Allocation 100.00% CAMP Pool Account 4017-001 Page 1 Page 61 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 351,484,246.94 Opening Balance 12/07/23 12/07/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (1,484,246.94) 350,000,000.00 12/08/23 12/08/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 80,000,000.00 430,000,000.00 12/08/23 12/08/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 70,000,000.00 500,000,000.00 12/15/23 12/15/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 95,000,000.00 595,000,000.00 12/18/23 12/18/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (90,000,000.00) 505,000,000.00 12/18/23 12/18/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (60,000,000.00) 445,000,000.00 12/19/23 12/19/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (20,000,000.00) 425,000,000.00 12/20/23 12/20/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (20,000,000.00) 405,000,000.00 12/22/23 12/22/23 Redemption - Outgoing Wires 1.00 (80,000,000.00) 325,000,000.00 12/26/23 12/26/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 20,000,000.00 345,000,000.00 12/27/23 12/27/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 70,000,000.00 415,000,000.00 12/27/23 12/27/23 Purchase - Incoming Wires 1.00 35,000,000.00 450,000,000.00 12/29/23 01/02/24 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 2,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 Account 4017-001 Page 2 Page 62 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County - Liquidity Fund - 4017-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate 452,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 429,838,144.96 16,359,463.87 0.00 (1,383,246,287.75) 1,515,450,494.27 319,821,464.14 2,025,670.66 452,025,670.66 0.00 (271,484,246.94) 372,025,670.66 351,484,246.94 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance December January-December 5.55% Account 4017-001 Page 3 Page 63 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement - Transaction Summary Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 25,428,848.85 119,909.84 0.00 0.00 $25,548,758.69 CAMP Pool Unsettled Trades 0.00 119,909.84 Cash Dividends and Income Opening Market Value Purchases Redemptions Change in Value Closing Market Value 10,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $10,000,000.00 CAMP TERM Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Cash Dividends and Income December 31, 2023 November 30, 2023 Asset Summary CAMP Pool 25,548,758.69 25,428,848.85 CAMP TERM 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 $35,548,758.69 $35,428,848.85 Total Asset Allocation 71.87% CAMP Pool 28.13% CAMP TERM Account 6164-001 Page 1 Page 64 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Investment Holdings Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 CAMP TERM Date Security Description Date Rate Amount Maturity Est. Value atSettlementMaturityInvestment Date Trade Estimated Earnings 10,264,579.24 172,284.16 10,000,000.00 5.6300 03/01/24TERM - California Asset Management Program Term Dec 2409/11/2309/08/23 $10,000,000.00 $172,284.16 $10,264,579.24 Total Account 6164-001 Page 2 Page 65 For the Month Ending December 31, 2023Account Statement Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - Contra Costa County Schools Insurance Group - 6164-001 Total Settlement Dollar AmountShare or Trade Shares OwnedDate Transaction Description of TransactionUnit PriceDate CAMP Pool 25,428,848.85 Opening Balance 12/29/23 01/02/24 Accrual Income Div Reinvestment - Distributions 1.00 119,909.84 25,548,758.69 25,548,758.69 25,548,758.69 25,548,758.69 25,440,453.03 546,164.44 0.00 (10,000,000.00) 34,546,164.44 1,002,594.25 119,909.84 25,548,758.69 0.00 0.00 119,909.84 25,428,848.85 Monthly Distribution Yield Average Monthly Balance Closing Balance Fiscal YTDMonth of Cash Dividends and Income Closing Balance Check Disbursements Redemptions (Excl. Checks) Purchases Opening Balance Closing Balance December July-December 5.55% Account 6164-001 Page 3 Page 66 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Ending Balance Last Accounting Period 30-Sep-23 $- Receipts For This Period Cash Dividends 114,279.56 Interest On Bonds - From Other Sources -114,279.56 - Disbursements For This Period Purchases - For Other Purposes -- Ending Balance This Accounting Period 31-Dec-23 $- Summary of Income Cash Ending Balance Last Accounting Period 30-Sep-23 $- Receipts For This Period Sales and Maturities 1,300,000.00 From Other Sources 214,279.56 1,514,279.56 Disbursements For This Period Purchases -214,279.56 For Other Purposes -1,300,000.00 -1,514,279.56 Ending Balance This Accounting Period 31-Dec-23 $- Ending Balance Last Accounting Period 30-Sep-23 $12,990,311.65 Assets Purchased or Otherwise Acquired 214,279.56 Assets Sold or Otherwise Disposed of -1,300,000.00 Ending Balance This Accounting Period 31-Dec-23 $11,904,591.21 Market Value of Account $11,904,591.21 Summary of Principal Cash Summary of Investments BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 1 of 4 Page 67 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Schedule of Transactions - By Entry Date Transactions Income Cash Principal Cash Principal Investments Invested Income Ending Balance Last Statement Period 30-Sep-23 $--12,990,311.65 - 02-Oct-23 Cash Dividend on FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 Due on 02-Oct-2023 38,086.30 --- 03-Oct-23 Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer To Primary (Capital) -38,086.30 -- Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer From Primary (Income) -38,086.30 --- Purchase 38086.3 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --38,086.30 38,086.30 - 27-Oct-23 Cash Receipt - Miscellaneous Receipt via Wire -100,000.00 -- 30-Oct-23 Purchase 100000 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --100,000.00 100,000.00 - 01-Nov-23 Daily Rate Income on FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 For Period of 01-Oct-2023 to 31-Oct-2023 Due on 01-Nov-2023 39,840.61 --- 02-Nov-23 Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer From Primary (Income) -39,840.61 --- Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer To Primary (Capital) -39,840.61 -- Purchase 39840.61 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --39,840.61 39,840.61 - BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 2 of 4 Page 68 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Schedule of Transactions - By Entry Date Transactions Income Cash Principal Cash Principal Investments Invested Income 01-Dec-23 Cash Disbursement Via Wire, Paid To WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTH CARE DIST --1,300,000.00 -- Daily Rate Income on FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 For Period of 01-Nov-2023 to 30-Nov-2023 Due on 01-Dec-2023 36,352.65 --- Sale 1300000 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD -1,300,000.00 -1,300,000.00 - 04-Dec-23 Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer From Primary (Income) -36,352.65 --- Cash Transfer - Portfolio Transfer To Primary (Capital) -36,352.65 -- Purchase 36352.65 Units of FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 @ 1 USD --36,352.65 36,352.65 - Ending Balance This Statement Period 31-Dec-23 $--11,904,591.21 - BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 3 of 4 Page 69 W Contra Costa Hcd 2019 Deposit AC (229842000) Begin Date : 10/01/2023 End Date : 12/31/2023 Account Information Account Number Account Name 229842000 WEST CONTRA COSTA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 2019 DEPOSIT ACCOUNT Schedule of Assets as of December 31, 2023 Cusip Asset Name Shares Book Value Market Value Est Income Yield CASH Principal Cash ---- Income Cash ---- CASH Total ---- Open-end Money Market fund 60934N666 FEDERATED INSTITUTIONAL TAX FREE 73 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 461,101.36 3.87 Open-end Money Market fund Total 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 461,101.36 3.87 229842000 Total 11,904,591.21 11,904,591.21 461,101.36 3.87 BOOK VALUE - TRANSACTIONS Run Date : 01/23/2024 Page 4 of 4 Page 70 SECTION III APPENDIX B. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAIL – MANAGED BY OUTSIDE CONTRACTED PARTIES B. 7. EAST BAY REGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AUTHORITY (EBRCS) EBRCS TRANSACTIONS* as of December 31, 2023 FY 2023-2024 FUND BALANCE @ TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date TJ/Date BALANCE @ NUMBER 09/30/23 12/31/23 100300 863,700.20 863,700.20 TOTALS 863,700.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 863,700.20 * East Bay Regional Communications System Authority Page 71 EXHIBITS Note: All exhibits are prepared for information only. The exhibits are unaudited but due diligence was utilized in its preparation. The information in the exhibits may be updated and is subject to change without notice. Changes will be reflected in the next reports. Exhibit I CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL PERFORMANCE SUMMARY 12/31/2023 AVERAGE DAYS TO 3 PERCENT OF MATURITY AT PAR PORTFOLIO YTM END-OF-QUARTER DURATION ($)(%)(%)(day)(year) A. Investments Managed by Treasurer's Office1 $5,943,641,404.12 86.48%4.7290%288 0.73 2 B. Investments Managed by Outside Contractors3 1. PFM $77,246,529.93 1.12%3.8190%755 1.71 2 2. Local Agency Investment Fund $243,018,219.68 3.54%3.8100%1 0.00 3. Allspring Global Investments $44,636,239.69 0.65%5.1720%331 0.55 4 4. CAMP $487,574,429.35 7.09%5.5500%5 0 0.00 5. CalTRUST Liquidity Fund $0.00 0.00%N/A 0 0.00 6. US Bank (Federated Tax Free Cash Fund)$11,904,591.21 0.17%3.8700%0 0.00 C. Cash $65,039,212.59 0.95%1.65%6 0 0.00 3 Yield to Maturity on Portfolio at End-of-Quarter = 4.72% 3 Weighted Average Days to Maturity on Portfolio at End-of-Quarter = 259 3 Weighted Duration (yr) at End-of-Quarter =0.65 1. Excludes the funds managed by PFM. 2. Data is provided by SymPro. 3. Excludes: EBRCS Bonds, Futuris Public Entity Trust, Benefit Trust ST Fund, etc. 4. Data provided by Allspring Global Investments. 5. Monthly Distribution Yield as of the quarter end. 6. Wells Fargo Bank Average Earnings Credit Rate on Investable Balance for the quarter. LAIF is subject to a one day call of principal provision. CAMP, CalTRUST Liquidity Fund and Federated provide a same day liquidity provision. WEIGHTED Exhibit II 0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 2.50% 3.00% 3.50% 4.00% 4.50% 5.00% 5.50% 6.00% Yield to Maturity as of December 31, 2023 Treasurer PFM LAIF Allspring CAMP US Bank Exhibit III CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL 12/31/239/30/23CHANGE IN VALUETYPEPAR VALUEPAR VALUEFROM PREV. QTR.% CHANGEA. Investments Managed by Treasurer's Office 1. U.S. Treasuries (STRIPS, Bills, Notes) $755,256,000.00 $775,904,000.00 ($20,648,000.00)-2.66% 2. U.S. Agencies Federal Home Loan Banks $1,120,117,000.00 $1,273,526,327.55 (153,409,327.55)-12.05% Federal National Mortgage Association $364,400,000.00 $224,400,000.00 140,000,000.0062.39% Federal Farm Credit Banks $563,970,000.00 $488,970,000.00 75,000,000.0015.34% Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation 653,000,000.00 388,000,000.00 265,000,000.0068.30% Subtotal $2,701,487,000.00 $2,374,896,327.55 326,590,672.4513.75% 3. Supranationals $588,000,000.00 $463,000,000.00 125,000,000.0021.26% 4. Money Market Instruments Commercial Paper $1,552,450,000.00 $978,139,000.00 574,311,000.0058.71% Negotiable Certificates of Deposit $175,000,000.00 $135,000,000.00 40,000,000.0029.63% Time Deposit3,404.12 3,404.12 0.000.00% Subtotal $1,727,453,404.12 $1,104,825,564.59 622,627,839.5356.36% 5. Corporate Notes $171,445,000.00 $171,445,000.00 0.000.00%TOTAL (Section A)5,943,641,404.12 4,898,387,731.67 1,053,570,511.9821.51%B. Investments Managed by Outside Contractors 1. PFM$77,246,529.93 $75,266,134.13 1,980,395.802.63% 2. Local Agency Investment Fund $243,018,219.68 $228,629,277.66 14,388,942.026.29% 3. Allspring Global Investments $44,636,239.69 $43,915,777.22 720,462.481.64% 4. CAMP $487,574,429.35 $386,567,320.25 101,007,109.1026.13% 5. CalTRUST (Liquidity Fund) $0.00 $0.00 0.000.00% 6. US Bank (Federated Tax Free Cash) $11,904,591.21 $12,990,311.65 (1,085,720.44)-8.36% 7. Other a. EBRCS Bond $863,700.20 $863,700.20 0.000.00%TOTAL (Section B)865,243,710.06 749,411,491.70 115,832,218.3615.46%C. Cash1$65,039,212.59 $75,651,087.86 (10,611,875.27)-14.03%* GRAND TOTAL (FOR A , B, & C)$6,873,924,326.77 $5,723,450,311.23 $1,150,474,015.5420.10%* Excludes the Futuris Public Entity Trust of the Contra Costa Community College District Retirement Board of Authority1. Negative cash balance was due to one-business day delay in reporting daily cash balance by Wells Fargo Bank. There was no bank account overdraft. Exhibit IV Quarterly PMIA PMIA Ave. Apportionment Quarter to Date Effective Rate Yield Yield Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)4.00%3.81%3.929 10/1/23 - 12/31/23 12/31/23 High Ave.Low Federal Funds Target Rate*2 5.5000%5.5000%5.5000%5.5000% Federal Fund Rates Index*3 5.3100%5.3100%5.3100%5.3100% 6-Month Treasury Bill 5.1912%5.3425%5.2473%5.1388% SOFR180A Index*4 5.3473%5.3473%5.2724%5.1730% Fidelity Money Market Fund*5 5.1000% *1. For reference only. *2. Short-term interest rate targeted by the Federal Reserve's FOMC as part of its monetary policy. *3. The ICAP Fed Funds Rates are posted by the ICAP Fed Funds Desk. These rates are general indications and are determined by using the levels posted to the desk by highly rated large domestic and international banks. *4. 180 day average SOFR Secured Overnight Financing Rate. *5 Ticker SPRXX: 7 day yield at the quarter end. INDICES AND BENCHMARKS*1 AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2023 Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # TOYOTA MCC - CORP 89236TGT6 2/13/2025 1.800 13,150,000.00 12,718,601.10 13,143,010.34 Make-whole call +10bps until 2/13/25 bullet 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ELQ49 6/30/2025 0.700 20,000,000.00 18,853,300.00 20,000,000.00 Callable on and after 6/30/21 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3136G4XK4 6/30/2025 0.650 20,000,000.00 18,923,920.00 20,000,000.00 Quarterly: Last call on 12/30/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3136G4S87 8/27/2025 0.650 10,000,000.00 9,402,510.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 8/27/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EL7K4 9/16/2025 0.550 10,000,000.00 9,361,540.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 9/16/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GWWT9 9/30/2025 0.550 10,000,000.00 9,347,100.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 9/30/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EL7K4 9/16/2025 0.550 10,000,000.00 9,361,540.00 9,999,313.23 Callable on and after 9/16/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GWUE4 9/30/2025 0.500 10,000,000.00 9,338,800.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 9/30/22 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14316HAC6 8/15/2025 0.500 26,675.57 26,395.85 26,641.45 10% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GW3Z7 10/28/2025 0.600 10,000,000.00 9,317,410.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 10/28/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GWVC7 9/29/2025 0.500 10,000,000.00 9,339,820.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 9/29/22 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3136G46N8 10/29/2025 0.600 10,000,000.00 9,316,400.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 10/29/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMFR8 11/3/2025 0.540 10,000,000.00 9,300,110.00 9,993,931.67 Callable on and after 11/3/22 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXEJ9 11/24/2025 0.640 10,000,000.00 9,296,230.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 11/24/21 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXFA7 11/26/2025 0.650 10,000,000.00 9,296,040.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 11/26/21 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135G06K4 12/17/2025 0.650 10,000,000.00 9,272,910.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/17/21 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135G06Q1 12/30/2025 0.640 10,000,000.00 9,258,140.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/30/21 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14316NAC3 12/15/2025 0.340 36,543.46 35,872.19 36,516.78 10% deal call 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HEU2 2/8/2024 0.350 140,000.00 139,242.18 139,996.69 Make-whole call +5bps until 2/8/24 6911 APPLE INC - CORP 037833EB2 2/8/2026 0.700 10,000,000.00 9,261,690.00 9,997,527.13 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 1/8/26 8177 APPLE INC - CORP 037833EB2 2/8/2026 0.700 10,000,000.00 9,261,690.00 9,994,616.89 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 1/8/26 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AKXB7 2/11/2026 0.580 10,000,000.00 9,243,750.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 5/11/21 8177 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PBY1 2/16/2025 0.563 245,000.00 243,357.52 245,000.00 Callable on and after 2/16/24 6911 CHARLES SCHWAB - CORP 808513BN4 3/18/2024 0.750 245,000.00 242,483.61 244,991.27 Make-whole call +7bps; Callable on and after 2/18/2024 6911 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMUK6 3/25/2026 1.050 10,000,000.00 9,297,970.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/25/22 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14314QAC8 2/17/2026 0.520 102,063.55 99,799.37 102,008.60 10% collateral call 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ALXV1 4/22/2026 1.100 10,000,000.00 9,294,880.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 4/22/22 8177 CITIBANK NA - CORP 172967MX6 5/1/2025 0.981 160,000.00 157,284.64 160,000.00 Make-whole call +10bps; Callable after 5/1/24 6911 AMAZON - CORP 023135BX3 5/12/2026 1.000 10,000,000.00 9,237,600.00 9,984,776.56 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 4/12/26 8177 AMAZON - CORP 023135BX3 5/12/2026 1.000 5,000,000.00 4,618,800.00 4,990,704.75 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 4/12/26 8177 AMAZON - CORP 023135BX3 5/12/2026 1.000 5,000,000.00 4,618,800.00 4,990,699.58 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 4/12/26 8177 UNITED HEALTH - CORP 91324PEB4 5/15/2024 0.550 260,000.00 255,302.58 259,966.33 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 5/15/22 6911 UNITED HEALTH - CORP 91324PEB4 5/15/2024 0.550 260,000.00 255,302.58 259,966.33 Call on and anytime after 5/15/22 6911 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PCH7 6/1/2025 0.824 190,000.00 185,931.72 190,000.00 Make-whole call +7.5bps; Callable after 6/1/24 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AMMY5 6/10/2026 1.050 10,000,000.00 9,243,530.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/10/21 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMH21 6/15/2026 0.900 10,000,000.00 9,204,890.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 6/15/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AMYJ5 6/30/2026 1.000 10,000,000.00 9,215,470.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 6/30/22 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EMP22 6/30/2026 0.910 10,000,000.00 9,194,410.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 6/30/23 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AN2Z2 6/30/2026 1.000 10,000,000.00 9,215,470.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 12/30/21 8177 APPLE INC - CORP 037833EB2 2/8/2026 0.700 10,000,000.00 9,261,690.00 9,988,031.79 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 1/8/26 8177 CARMAX - ABS 14317DAC4 6/15/2026 0.550 276,544.63 267,930.54 276,499.14 10% collateral call 6911 UNILEVER CAPITAL - CORP 904764BN6 8/12/2024 0.626 125,000.00 121,372.75 125,000.00 Make-whole call +5bps until 5/12/22 6911 UNILEVER CAPITAL - CORP 904764BN6 8/12/2024 0.626 125,000.00 121,372.75 125,000.00 Make-whole call +5bps until 8/12/22 Callable afterward 6911 JOHNSON & JOHNS - CORP 478160CN2 9/1/2025 0.550 15,295,000.00 14,328,937.21 15,241,133.09 Make-whole call +5bps; Callable on and after 8/1/25 8177 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP 02665WDY4 8/9/2024 0.750 100,000.00 97,207.40 99,986.30 Make-whole call +7.5bps until 8/9/24 6911 CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP 14913R2P1 9/13/2024 0.600 370,000.00 358,192.93 369,882.48 Make-whole call +22bps until 9/13/24 6911 BANK OF NY MELLON - CORP 06406RAX5 10/25/2024 0.850 355,000.00 342,741.14 354,937.18 Callable on and after 9/25/24 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130APDQ5 10/28/2026 1.250 10,000,000.00 9,185,010.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 1/28/22 8177 AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP 025816CG2 7/30/2024 2.500 325,000.00 319,268.95 327,514.70 Callable on and after 6/30/24 6911 AMERICAN EXPRESS - CORP 025816CG2 7/30/2024 2.500 100,000.00 98,236.60 100,773.75 Callable on and after 6/30/24 6911 TARGET CORP - CORP 87612EBD7 7/1/2024 3.500 250,000.00 247,814.25 253,024.46 Make-whole call +15bps until 7/1/24 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130APW43 12/2/2026 1.500 10,000,000.00 9,225,230.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 3/2/2022 8711 BANK OF AMERICA - CORP 06051GKE8 12/6/2025 1.530 500,000.00 480,674.50 500,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 12/6/24 Quarterly call after 6911 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENHC7 12/14/2026 1.600 10,000,000.00 9,244,320.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/14/22 8177 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENHC7 12/14/2026 1.600 10,000,000.00 9,244,320.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/14/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQBP7 12/23/2024 1.200 10,000,000.00 9,646,510.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 3/23/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQ5X7 12/30/2024 1.150 10,000,000.00 9,636,780.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 3/30/22 8177 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE - CORP 02665WEA5 1/13/2025 1.500 300,000.00 289,433.40 299,918.37 Make-whole call +7.5bps 6911 CITIGROUP INC - CORP 17327CAN3 1/25/2026 2.014 85,000.00 81,677.61 85,000.00 Make-whole call +12bps until 1/25/25 then quarterly call 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQJH7 1/28/2027 1.750 10,000,000.00 9,292,360.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly: starts 2/28/22 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENNG1 2/8/2027 1.860 10,000,000.00 9,315,990.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 2/8/23 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AQRH8 2/25/2027 2.000 10,000,000.00 9,346,980.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 5/25/22 8177 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BR3 2/6/2026 1.746 150,000.00 144,136.80 150,000.00 Callable on and after 2/6/25 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BM4 3/30/2026 2.901 75,000.00 72,868.95 76,239.10 Callable on and after 3/30/25 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFC1 2/7/2025 1.875 105,000.00 101,359.13 104,998.84 Make-whole call +10bps 6911 MORGAN STANLEY - CORP 61747YEM3 2/18/2026 2.630 450,000.00 435,519.00 450,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 2/18/25; call anytime after 1/18/26 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BM4 3/30/2026 2.901 400,000.00 388,634.40 404,407.35 Callable on and after 3/30/25 6911 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PCV6 2/24/2025 2.595 400,000.00 387,369.60 400,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 2/24/25; call anytime after 1/24/26 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AR2H3 3/4/2027 2.770 10,000,000.00 9,572,080.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly: starts 4/4/22 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133ENSK7 3/21/2025 2.190 10,000,000.00 9,686,300.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and after 3/21/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXPZ1 9/27/2024 2.200 10,000,000.00 9,794,110.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly: starts 4/27/22 8177 HOME DEPOT - CORP 437076CM2 4/15/2025 2.700 60,000.00 58,519.20 59,955.59 Make-whole call +10bps until 3/15/25; call anytime after 3/15/25 6911 AMAZON - CORP 023135CE4 4/13/2025 3.000 145,000.00 141,871.05 144,901.38 Make-whole call +5bps until 4/13/25 bullet 6911 JP MORGAN SECURITIES - CORP 46647PCZ7 4/26/2026 4.080 225,000.00 221,339.25 225,000.00 Make-whole call +20bps until 4/26/25; call anytime afterward 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ARPD7 4/28/2027 3.375 9,900,000.00 9,653,024.70 9,900,000.00 Quarterly: starts 4/28/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXRS5 4/29/2025 3.100 10,000,000.00 9,784,360.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly: starts 7/29/22 8177 CINTAS CORP - CORP 17252MAP5 5/1/2025 3.450 160,000.00 157,128.00 159,984.33 Make-whole call +15bps until 4/1/25; call anytime afterward 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFE7 6/15/2025 3.450 70,000.00 68,540.71 69,991.17 Make-whole call +15bps until 6/15/25 bullet 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GXXS8 6/27/2025 3.250 10,000,000.00 9,834,570.00 10,000,000.00 Semi Annually: starts 6/27/22 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ASN47 7/26/2024 3.320 10,000,000.00 9,901,310.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 IBM - CORP 459200KS9 7/27/2025 4.000 540,000.00 534,032.46 540,000.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 7/27/25 bullet 6911 TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP 89788MAH5 7/28/2026 4.260 235,000.00 230,120.93 235,000.00 Make-whole call +20bps until 7/28/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130ASQR3 7/26/2024 3.570 10,000,000.00 9,915,080.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP 194162AM5 8/15/2025 3.100 120,000.00 117,366.24 119,940.63 Make-whole call +5bps until 8/15/25 bullet 6911 WALMART INC - CORP 931142EW9 9/9/2025 3.900 285,000.00 282,167.67 284,887.69 Make-whole call +10bps until 9/9/25 bullet 6911 HOME DEPOT - CORP 437076CR1 9/15/2025 4.000 75,000.00 74,305.35 74,984.59 Make-whole call +7.5bps until 8/15/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GX2E3 9/20/2024 4.050 10,000,000.00 9,924,140.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 3/20/23 8177 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AT3P0 9/14/2027 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,908,590.00 10,000,000.00 Monthly call: starts 10/14/22 8177 WALMART INC - CORP 931142EW9 9/9/2025 3.900 11,000,000.00 10,890,682.00 10,876,839.85 Make-whole call +10bps until 9/9/25 bullet 8177 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP 539830BU2 10/15/2025 4.950 120,000.00 120,935.52 119,794.35 Make-whole call +10bps until 9/15/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GX4M3 10/25/2024 5.080 10,000,000.00 9,983,690.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 1/25/23 8177 UNITED HEALTH - CORP 91324PEN8 10/15/2025 5.150 80,000.00 80,872.40 79,995.65 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 10/15/25 bullet 6911 PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP 693475BH7 10/28/2025 5.671 240,000.00 239,877.36 240,000.00 Annual call: starts 10/28/24 6911 TRUIST FINANCIAL - CORP 89788MAJ1 10/28/2026 5.900 250,000.00 252,054.25 250,000.00 Make-whole call +25bps until 10/28/25 6911 CARMAX - ABS 14318UAD3 8/16/2027 5.340 380,000.00 381,105.42 379,910.89 10% collateral call 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFF4 10/30/2025 5.450 70,000.00 70,700.77 69,942.76 Make-whole call +15bps 6911 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL - CORP 438516CH7 11/1/2024 4.850 325,000.00 323,864.12 324,976.95 Make-whole call +10bps until 11/1/24 bullet 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BX0 11/4/2026 5.751 105,000.00 106,621.62 105,000.00 One time call: 11/4/25 6911 COMCAST - CORP 20030NDZ1 11/7/2025 5.250 100,000.00 101,057.80 99,983.35 Make-whole call +15bps until 11/7/25 bullet 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GY2W1 8/25/2025 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,974,960.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 8/25/23 8177 LINDE INC CT - CORP 53522KAB9 12/5/2025 4.700 530,000.00 530,429.30 529,632.18 Make-whole call +10bps until 11/5/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GY6L1 6/18/2026 4.750 15,000,000.00 14,938,665.00 15,000,000.00 One time call: 6/20/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GY6M9 6/21/2027 4.800 15,000,000.00 14,925,225.00 15,000,000.00 One time call: 6/21/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYA69 9/27/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,910.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 9/27/23 8177 IBRD - SUPRA 45906M3M1 12/27/2027 5.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 6/27/24 8177 CATERPILLAR FINL - CORP 14913R3B1 1/6/2026 4.800 175,000.00 175,999.78 174,970.63 Make-whole call: +10bps until 1/26/26 bullet 6911 PEPSICO INC - CORP 713448CY2 7/17/2025 3.500 300,000.00 295,123.20 294,560.63 Make-whole call +20bps until 4/17/25 call anytime afterward 6911 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES - CORP 693475BL8 1/26/2027 4.758 45,000.00 44,645.63 45,000.00 Semi-annual call: starts 1/26/26 6911 MERCEDES BENZ AUTO - ABS 58770AAC7 11/15/2027 4.510 95,000.00 94,392.86 94,988.60 5% collateral call 6911 INTEL CORP-CORP 458140AS9 7/29/2025 3.700 375,000.00 369,043.50 370,022.92 Make-whole call +25bps until 4/29/25 call anytime afterward 6911 STATE STREET CORP - CORP 857477BZ5 1/26/2026 4.857 45,000.00 44,786.84 45,000.00 Callable on and after 1/26/25 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GADZ1 1/26/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,996,470.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 TOYOTA AUTO REC - ABS 891940AC2 9/15/2027 4.630 170,000.00 168,975.07 169,999.92 5% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAEH0 7/30/2024 4.800 10,000,000.00 9,977,660.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/30/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYFD9 1/30/2025 4.770 10,000,000.00 9,970,240.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/30/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYDB5 10/30/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 10,002,580.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/30/24 8177 EXXON MOBIL - CORP 30231GAT9 3/1/2026 3.043 550,000.00 534,089.60 535,344.43 Make-whole call +20bps until 12/1/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYGH9 2/6/2025 4.800 10,000,000.00 9,971,390.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 2/6/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135G06V0 8/28/2025 4.125 4,400,000.00 4,377,159.60 4,363,193.39 Quarterly call: starts 11/28/22 8177 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFH0 3/13/2026 4.450 60,000.00 59,909.10 59,969.71 Make-whole call +15bps until 2/13/26 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AUUQ5 2/13/2025 5.020 10,000,000.00 9,994,730.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 2/13/24 8177 PEPSICO INC - CORP 713448FQ6 2/13/2026 4.550 225,000.00 225,899.33 224,907.75 Make-whole call +10bps until 1/13/26 call anytime afterward 6911 HDMOT - ABS 41285JAD0 12/15/2027 5.050 120,000.00 119,094.95 119,987.92 10% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYHZ8 2/28/2028 5.100 10,000,000.00 9,972,980.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 2/28/24 8177 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE - CORP 194162AQ6 3/2/2026 4.800 185,000.00 187,333.59 184,844.96 Make-whole call +5bps until 3/2/26 bullet 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BNGT5 1/25/2026 2.745 300,000.00 289,101.30 282,515.63 1% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BRQJ7 7/25/2026 2.570 300,000.00 286,480.80 278,976.56 1% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137FJXQ7 8/25/2025 3.750 347,710.68 341,613.92 336,790.39 1% collateral call 6911 FORDO - ABS 344928AD8 2/15/2028 4.650 185,000.00 184,316.43 184,980.70 10% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAGF2 4/10/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,989,330.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/10/23 8177 DCENT 2023 A1 A MTGE - ABS 254683CY9 3/15/2028 4.310 225,000.00 223,428.83 224,986.95 Callable 6911 GMCAR - ABS 362583AD8 2/16/2028 4.470 120,000.00 119,227.92 119,996.70 10% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAGN5 4/12/2024 5.000 10,000,000.00 9,989,410.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/12/23 8177 FHMS - MBS 3137BSP72 8/25/2026 2.653 525,000.00 500,938.20 501,108.40 1% collateral call 6911 FHLB - AGENCY 3130AVR87 1/26/2024 5.125 10,000,000.00 9,998,300.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 7/26/23 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAGV7 4/26/2024 5.125 10,000,000.00 9,994,150.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 10/26/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYS60 6/17/2024 5.200 10,000,000.00 9,980,920.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 8/17/23 8177 FHMS - MBS 3137BRQJ7 7/25/2026 2.570 350,000.00 334,227.60 332,800.78 1% collateral call 6911 TAOT 2023 B A3 - MBS 891941AD8 2/15/2028 4.710 260,000.00 259,601.16 259,985.47 5% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BTUM1 11/25/2026 3.347 254,618.86 246,771.25 246,781.37 1% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYTE2 5/30/2028 5.200 10,000,000.00 9,971,330.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 5/30/24 8177 HAROT - ABS 437927AC0 11/15/2027 4.930 185,000.00 185,866.54 184,970.03 10% collateral call 6911 IADB - SUPRA 45818WEP7 6/15/2028 4.300 10,000,000.00 10,004,950.00 9,984,405.56 One time call: 6/15/26 8177 IADB - SUPRA 45818WEP7 6/15/2028 4.300 10,000,000.00 10,004,950.00 9,946,533.33 One time call: 6/15/26 8177 IBRD - SUPRA 45906M4E8 6/26/2028 4.500 10,000,000.00 10,069,470.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 6/26/26 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAHX2 6/28/2024 5.330 10,000,000.00 10,002,010.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 12/28/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYVD1 6/26/2026 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,988,170.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts6/26/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAJ69 7/10/2026 5.375 10,000,000.00 9,997,300.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/10/24 8177 FFCB - AGENCY 3133EPPV1 7/14/2028 5.430 10,000,000.00 10,041,570.00 10,000,000.00 Callable on and anytime after 7/14/25 8177 ALLYA - ABS 02007WAC2 5/15/2028 5.460 165,000.00 166,894.70 164,971.87 10% collateral call 6911 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAJA0 7/19/2024 5.400 10,000,000.00 9,991,570.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/16/24 8177 FNMA - AGENCY 3135GAJH5 7/26/2024 5.600 10,000,000.00 9,982,150.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 1/26/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYXM9 7/26/2028 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,971,380.00 10,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 7/26/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYY97 7/26/2028 5.630 15,000,000.00 14,977,680.00 15,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 7/26/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYX31 7/25/2025 5.500 10,000,000.00 9,991,440.00 10,000,000.00 One time call: 4/25/24 8177 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY - CORP 94988J6D4 8/7/2026 5.450 250,000.00 254,073.25 249,811.15 Make-whole call +15bps until 7/7/26 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYYY2 8/14/2028 6.000 10,000,000.00 9,981,750.00 10,000,000.00 Quarterly call: starts 2/14/24 8177 BANK OF AMERICA - CORP 06428CAA2 8/18/2026 5.526 350,000.00 356,460.65 350,000.00 Callable on and anytime after 7/17/26 6911 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V Maturity Coupon Description CUSIP Date Rate Par ($)Market ($)Cost ($)Provisions Fund # CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TREASURER'S INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023 FITAT - ABS 31680EAD3 8/15/2028 5.530 510,000.00 517,074.21 509,968.38 10% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134GYZ96 8/28/2028 6.150 10,000,000.00 10007980.000 9,995,341.67 Monthly call: starts 11/28/23 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1CF8 9/18/2028 5.000 10,000,000.00 10021080.000 9,897,520.06 Annual call: starts 9/18/24 8177 IBRD - SUPRA 45906M4H1 9/29/2028 5.750 10,000,000.00 10044390.000 9,988,138.89 Annual call: starts 9/29/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1ER0 9/27/2028 5.875 8,000,000.00 8008600.000 8,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 9/27/24 8177 CITIBANK NA - CORP 17325FBA5 9/29/2025 5.864 255,000.00 259213.880 255,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 8/29/25 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1FG3 10/11/2028 5.750 10,000,000.00 10,032,583.30 10,000,000.00 One time: 10/11/24 8177 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1EK5 7/11/2028 5.450 10,000,000.00 10,076,710.00 10,000,000.00 Annual call: starts 7/11/25 8177 GMCAR - ABS 379930AD2 8/16/2028 5.780 160,000.00 164,057.12 159,967.14 10% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137FNWX4 7/25/2026 2.282 400,000.00 380,211.20 371,140.63 1% collateral call 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1HN6 10/20/2028 5.500 10,000,000.00 10,239,240.00 10,000,000.00 One time: 10/20/25 8177 FHMS - MBS 3137FLN34 2/25/2026 3.208 350,000.00 340,350.15 333,457.03 1% collateral call 6911 NATIONAL RURAL - CORP 63743HFK3 11/13/2026 5.600 115,000.00 118,008.17 114,961.93 Make-whole call +15bps until10/13/26 call anytime afterward 6911 HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES - ABS 438123AC5 6/21/2028 5.670 85,000.00 86,776.08 84,985.03 10% collateral call 6911 FHMS - MBS 3137BSRE5 9/25/2026 3.120 600,000.00 571,552.20 568,289.06 1% collateral call 6911 CITIBANK NA - CORP 17325FBC1 12/4/2026 5.488 250,000.00 254,499.50 250,000.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 11/4/26 call anytime afterward 6911 HOME DEPOT - CORP 437076CV2 9/30/2026 4.950 155,000.00 157,220.22 154,669.57 Make-whole call +10bps until 8/30/26 call anytime afterward 6911 FHLMC - AGENCY 3134H1LJ0 12/11/2028 4.750 10,000,000.00 9,977,500.00 9,913,373.33 Annual call: starts 12/11/24 8177 BofA CC - ABS 05522RDH8 11/15/2028 4.980 145,000.00 146,687.22 144,980.53 collateral call 6911 966,204,156.75 935,781,906.22 965,456,934.51 Fund 8177: Treasury Fund 6911: CCC School Insurance Group managed by PFM Exhibit V (a) DESCRIPTION CUSIP MATURITY DATE PAR MARKET*COST PROVISIONS ($)($)($) AMCAR 2022-2 A2A 03065WAB1 12/18/2025 105,256.96 105,062.64 105,248.99 10% collateral call AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP 02665WEQ0 10/3/2025 500,000.00 515,703.84 499,535.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 10/3/25 bullet AMXCA 2021-1 A 02582JJR2 11/16/2026 800,000.00 771,493.76 749,656.25 cleanup call APPLE INC 037833CU2 5/11/2024 700,000.00 696,229.88 684,145.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 3/11/24; Call anytime after BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP 06406HCV9 5/15/2024 700,000.00 697,161.11 686,420.00 Callable on and after 4/15/24 BLACKROCK INC 09247XAL5 3/18/2024 500,000.00 502,833.57 507,990.00 Make-whole call +15bps until 3/18/24 bullet BMWLT 2023-1 A3 05593AAC3 11/25/2025 700,000.00 699,717.76 699,507.81 5% deal call CARMX 2023-4 A2A 14318XAB1 12/15/2026 350,000.00 353,690.20 349,976.27 10% collateral call CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP 14913UAB6 8/11/2025 500,000.00 513,644.49 500,875.00 Make-whole call +10bps CITIBANK NA 17325FAS7 1/23/2024 600,000.00 608,940.46 600,924.00 Make-whole call +20bps until 12/23/23; Call anytime after DCENT 2017-4 A 254683BZ7 4/15/2024 750,000.00 744,373.68 737,900.39 Collateral call EXXON MOBIL CORP 30231GAC6 3/15/2024 579,000.00 581,575.93 570,523.44 Make-whole call +7bps until 12/15/23; Call anytime after FORDL 2022-A A3 34528LAD7 5/15/2025 279,315.31 278,456.04 272,637.93 5% deal call GMALT 2023-1 A2A 362541AB0 6/20/2025 235,680.17 235,875.85 235,660.92 10% deal call HAROT 2023-1 A2 43815JAB9 10/21/2025 394,100.99 394,018.35 394,077.30 10% collateral call HAROT 2023-3 A2 43815QAB3 3/18/2026 400,000.00 402,005.50 400,375.00 10% collateral call HART 2022-C A2A 44933DAB7 11/17/2025 264,042.29 264,474.73 264,025.94 5% collateral call on 12/15/26 HART 2023-A A2A 448979AB0 12/15/2025 202,057.59 202,239.01 202,045.91 5% collateral call HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC 438516CH7 11/1/2024 750,000.00 753,407.19 749,872.50 Make-whole call +10bps until 11/1/24 bullet INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPM 459058HC0 8/6/2024 1,000,000.00 1,010,377.29 1,002,115.13 Foating: O/N SOFR +30bps JDOT 2022 A3 47787JAC2 9/15/2026 422,520.82 413,519.15 406,560.76 10% collateral call JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 46625HKC3 1/23/2025 700,000.00 694,972.19 681,898.00 Callable on and after 10/23/24 MBALT 2021-B A4 58769KAE4 3/15/2027 285,000.00 283,298.06 273,633.40 5% deal call MBART 2022-1 A3 58768PAC8 8/16/2027 400,000.00 401,494.62 399,015.63 5% collateral call MBART 2023-1 A2 58770AAB9 1/15/2026 60,021.24 60,057.08 60,019.17 5% collateral call MORGAN STANLEY 61761JVL0 10/23/2024 700,000.00 695,803.02 688,513.00 Make-whole call +25bps untilv10/23/24; bullet NAROT 2022-B A2 65480JAB6 8/16/2025 94,444.86 94,331.52 93,714.39 5% collateral call NAROT 2022-B A3 65480JAC4 5/17/2027 400,000.00 397,846.53 393,156.25 5% collateral call NAROT 2022-B A3 65480JAC4 5/17/2027 75,000.00 73,724.02 73,666.99 5% collateral call NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORP 63743HFF4 10/30/2025 700,000.00 713,501.28 703,556.00 Make-whole call +15bps SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP 828807DG9 9/13/2024 500,000.00 491,595.29 483,340.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 6/13/24; Call anytime after TAOT 2022-A A3 89239KAC5 6/15/2026 411,680.21 400,795.25 393,460.14 5% collateral call TAOT 2023-B A2A 891941AB2 4/15/2026 221,994.13 222,184.00 221,989.00 5% collateral call TRUIST BANK 86787EBC0 4/1/2024 600,000.00 600,840.26 600,356.40 Make-whole call +15bps until 3/1/24; Call anytime after UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 91324PEM0 10/15/2024 700,000.00 706,489.14 699,692.00 Make-whole call +10bps until 10/15/24 bullet VWALT 2022-A A2 92868AAB1 10/21/2024 5,106.13 5,108.02 5,105.73 10% deal call VWALT 2022-A A3 92868AAC9 7/21/2025 350,000.00 347,662.84 342,083.98 10% deal call VZMT 2022-2 A 92348KAH6 7/20/2028 800,000.00 770,976.72 756,968.75 One time call: 2/20/23 WELLS FARGO BANK NA 94988J6B8 8/1/2025 300,000.00 309,623.16 299,784.00 Make-whole call +12.5bps until 7/1/25; Call anytime after WOART 2020-B A3 98163WAC0 5/15/2025 19,337.71 19,301.36 18,935.84 10% collateral call WOLS 2022-A A3 98163NAC0 2/18/2025 416,917.66 414,915.94 407,813.87 5% deal call 18,471,476.07 18,449,320.74 18,216,776.10 *Based Market Value + Accrued Interest CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ALLSPRING GLOBAL INVESTMENTS STRUCTURED SECURITIES December 31, 2023